Does Kerry have anything to offer to the left?

[Estragon]

..no, I mean, the left.

For all intents and purposes, I'm anti-authoritarian. I'm a militant queer radical, feminist, pacifist, semi-primitivist (but definitely an environmentalist), etc etc. Those are all labels, yeah, and they don't mean much. But I have a lot of friends who are just like me, and are having trouble deciding whether or not to vote in this election.

From everything I've gathered so far, Kerry really doesn't have anything to offer me, or the rest of the radical left. Does he care about this at all? Probably not. I don't really know any statistics or shit about radicals in America, but I suppose they're far outnumbered by liberals and moderates. So I guess it's good strategy for him to aim there. But there are a lot of folks like me that would at least feel somewhat more at ease voting for this stooge if he had something, anything, worth voting for. (Besides not being Bush-- the Daily Show biopic was pretty accurate..)



I really am asking, because I don't know-- I maybe haven't done as much research into the guy as I should, but he just strikes me as another hawkish moneyed Clinton-ite Kennedy-ite liberal moderate type. Has he done anything significant for the queer community, women, or minorities? Does he really plan to crack down on corporations and the elite, a guy married into a corporation and probably one of the richest men in Boston?



And, skip the rhetoric; I've heard that before. Can anyone point me in the right direction?



Don't get me wrong, I don't want any more years of Bush. But I don't know how much I want four years of Kerry. I'm willing to be converted, if anyone's up for it..







(BTW, not sure if this belongs in general discussion or campaign stuff--move it if necessary..)

[West Coast Democrat]

1. ooohh, boy....

flame bait.

[sangh0]

2. How about considering what Kerry might do for the nation

instead of "What can Kerry do for ME, ME, ME!!!"

[Catholic Sensation]

OH MY GOD YOU WANT EVERYONE TO BENEFIT AND NOT JUST LIBERALS?

ARE YOU SELFISH OR SOMETHING?

</sarcasm>

[JohnKleeb]

22. haha

that was good. Yes, its not all about us liberals. Hell when I am gonna be presenting Kerry campaign lit in a week or so, I probably wont present Kerry the liberal democrat, I'll probably apporach Kerry's more moderate side, you know a man who has served his country, supports small business, believes in the right to choose, etc, what some people dont realize is that America is not black and white, that is its not liberal and conservative but its shades of gray, and Kerry in my opinion believes in shades of gray on many issues as well.

[Darranar]

36. "Corporations" and "everyone" are not the same. n/t

[Darranar]

31. What WILL Kerry do for the nation?

It's a question that's been troubling me for a while....

[Snoggera]

37. You may find your answer here

Go to:

http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

Look on the left hand side of the page, and do some reading.

(on the choices listed below)

Plans
National Security
Economy & Jobs
Health Care
Energy
Homeland Security
Education
Environment
More Issues...

Hope that helps.

[Darranar]

39. A load of propaganda isn't helpful.

Campaign websites are not quite objective in their portrayal of things.

[sangh0]

40. Hold on a asecond

and well fix up an information intravenous line for you.

[Snoggera]

41. Then do some searches

and find out how Kerry voted in the Senate on key issues that matter to you. Hopefully, you'll find that he presents not just a better choice, but a great choice to get your vote.

[Darranar]

54. Kerry has made a wide array of votes, some good, some bad...

on the issues that matter most to me.

But there are several things about him that set me back a lot.

He is not speaking out against the atrocities in Iraq. When Fallujah was being seiged, civilians were being slaughtered, residential centers bombed, and mosques targeted, why wasn't Kerry pointing out that this was despicable, illegal, and disgusting?

He is not speaking out against the crux of US foreign policy. It matters to me little whether it is the US or the US and NATO that represses the people of Iraq; what matters most to me is the repression, and he does not seem to advocate an end to that. Kerry promises withdrawal by the end of his first term, more than four years from now; that is too long, far too long. By then, how many Iraqi civilians would have been slaughtered? How many American soldiers would have lost their lives fighting on an imperial crusade?

He is not speaking out much against the current structure of global trade, where the rich nations have free reign to exploit and steal from the poor nations. He has spoken about protecting labor rights and preserving environmental standards, two essential things, but where is he about stopping the IMF and World Bank from their "structural adjustments" and mass forceful privatizations? Where is he when it comes to the intense pressure poor nations recieve to destroy their capital controls, allowing their economy to be annihilated by foreign investors? The Democratic Platform calls for the US to "encourage" other nations to open their markets. This is not a policy I support.

Kerry has failed to speak out against US intervention in Venezuela (in fact, he has attacked Bush for not intervening enough to "preserve democracy" in typical American fashion. I am sure the Venezuelans will be happy to hear that Kerry supports them recieving the same benevolent aid that was sent to Nicaragua, Iraq, Chile, Haiti, Iran, and dozens of other nations throughout the world.) To be fair, his stance on this is not that clear, and I may simply be reading him unfairly.

Almost no one claims to support corporate influence on the government. As in other cases where words matter only negligibly, it is most important to look at the actual record, and when it comes to corporate influence on US foreign policy, Kerry seems to be affected by it. If he is part of it, how can he be against it?

Kerry is better than Bush. As he is basically the "Anti-Bush" in this election, I cannot oppose him, and I do not. But my support for him is far from enthusiastic.

[sangh0]

55. In that case, I suggest

you wait for the perfect candidate.

[Darranar]

59. An impossibility at this point, hence my reluctant support for Kerry. n/t

[sangh0]

60. An impossibility at any point

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. A foolish adherence to consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

[Darranar]

65. It is true that it is an impossibility at any point...

that is one reason I was a bit confused by your statement that I should wait for one....

Your last quote is one of my least favorites; what is the stater advocating, hypocrisy and doublethink?

[Snoggera]

46. This may help

Of course, he hasn't voted on many bills because he is running for president, but you can scroll down and read his vote and the entire bill.

Happy hunting!

http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/cgi-bin/membervotes.cgi?&lang=&member=MAJR&site=congressmerge&address=&city=&state=&zipcode=&fullvotes=1

[Darranar]

56. Thank you; many of his votes are familiar to me, but not all. n/t

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[swag]

4. What state do you live in?

Answer that, and then maybe somebody will be willing to expend some effort in persuading somebody who admits that maybe she should have done her own research to begin with.

Thanks in advance.

[Lucky Luciano]

5. Easy does it....

Living a life with such blood pressure is not good for your health.

[Must_B_Free]

6. My friends from MA say

Kerry is a TRUE liberal.

[JohnKleeb]

12. he has a record simliar to the senior senator from there

and in fact a slightly more liberal record. Kerry talks like a moderate but I believe he's in fact one of the most liberal members of the senate, oh and as a Virginian, I'd love to have a senator like Kerry represent me.

[Walt Starr]

7. Sure he does, WEDGIES!!!!

[Kahuna]

8. You mean as in the anarchist movement? I doubt it.

They would be barking up the wrong tree.

[nickgutierrez]

9. I consider myself a leftist, and a pacifist

He's got health care.

He's got at least a sketch of an exit plan.

He's got a fix for the tax plan.

He's not perfect, but it's a start. As directly opposed to several steps backwards, as Bush would be.

[sandnsea]

10. Incoming, from the left & right

Idiots one and all, as far as I'm concerned. Besides I don't think all of those who say they're on the left really are.

[JohnKleeb]

18. I dunno

but you know what I told you about some people and personality. The more agressive Kerry has gotten and people have seen it, the more Ive seen his stock raise on the boards, now for me Kerry doesnt have to go right at Bush, I just have to know who he is and what he is about and I am happy with him as the nominee.

[Darranar]

33. Kerry can call Bush an idiot for all I care, my opinion of him won't....

go up much.

More than aggressiveness is needed to reform this nation.

[JohnKleeb]

35. well Dar I never considered you to be a cult of personality person

now did I. You're about issues, I know that for a fact, but there are some but not all who just want them to criticize Bush to hell and back, why do you think Robert Byrd who is one of the most conservative democrats in the senate is well admired? not because of his stances on the issues but because he calls Bush and co out for what they are. Yes, more than agressiveness is needed to change the nation, I agree there.

[merh]

50. When you running?

For any office. I am tired of this baloney. Put your heart and soul and reputation where your mouth is. Don't say you don't have the money, both parties are desparate for qualified folks to run. Heck, the repukes ship them in to run for posts.

[Darranar]

58. That argument has never made much sense to me...

are we all forbidden from criticizing Bush, because we have never been president?

[sangh0]

61. Of course not

but your criticism basically amounts to "Kerry isn't perfect"

We know that.

[Darranar]

68. If "Kerry isn't perfect" was the worst an honest progressive could...

say about him, I wouldn't be worried.

Unfortunately, he is a lot more than just "not perfect".

[merh]

63. I am not supporting *, I am supporting Kerry.

You are not supporting Kerry, you are voting anti-Bush. Since you don't think Kerry is the perfect candidate and that he does not or cannot represent your views and serve your needs, then you should run for office.

Why do folks twist the simple concepts. If you don't like the job the candidate is doing, then run against him. That is what Kerry is doing, which is a heck of alot more than what you are doing.

:shrug:

[Darranar]

69. By your argument, I should support Cobb...

my favorite when it comes to the issues among the presidential candidates.

I am not about to run because I am completely and utterly unelectable, and I understand this. Similarly, I will not back Cobb because he is completely and utterly unelectable, and I understand this. Running for office is not the only way to change things, and in some cases it is not at all effective. I don't suppose you are fond of Nader?

[merh]

76. Sure, support Cobb if it is your politics that you care about and

not the future of the nation. If your issues, your "liberal agenda", your very narrow view of what makes a politician the perfect candidate are so important to you that you constantly criticize Kerry for not measuring up to your needs, then vote for Cobb.

The issue is the future of our nation.

[Darranar]

79. So you are saying that if I criticize Kerry I shouldn't vote for him?

Why?

Why shouldn't I criticize Kerry's stances on issues where I disagree with him while still support him as the Anti-Bush?

[merh]

80. No, think for yourself, you should find something about him

you like other than the fact that he isn't *. You should broaden your views and see the entire record of the man as it is. He is real and he has admirably served the nation. You should find some way to appreciate him and his service.

Just a suggestion.

edit: because I had an odd sentence in there!

[displacedtexan]

11. Do some research and decide for yourself.

If JK doesn't do it for you, maybe you should research the third party candidates. There are actually lots of them.

Personally, Bill Clinton was way too conservative for me in 1992, but look how great he was!

I'm a card-carrying Democrat. Maybe you're not ready to compromise. How old are you?

[Piperay]

13. Kerry is not chimp

nough said. If you can't find something in the fact that he is NOT a RW freak, than there is nothing more to say.

Anyway, I'm not so sure this post passes the 'sniff test'.

[trotsky]

14. So if you don't want any more Bush

but you aren't sure if you want Kerry,

WHAT DO YOU WANT?

Keep in mind, please, that there are more than 50 million Americans that you have to convince to see things your way before you get the dream candidate you want.

[sangh0]

15. Gee, another hit and run poster

quelle surprise!!

[papau]

16. Label shopping? - General answer is Yes - he has a lot to offer to "left"

militant queer radical, feminist, pacifist, semi-primitivist (but definitely an environmentalist)

And I suspect for each label, if you hold up Bush vs Kerry you come down as for Kerry

Just on "definitely an environmentalist" - Kerry's record is 100% - check LCV for a hard nose review if you like.

But if you want "militant" anything - I doubt you want someone who can be elected.

But hang around DU in either case - the conversations should be fun!

:-)

[noahmijo]

17. Nope Kerry has nothing to offer you. He is not a radical

I suggest you shill for these people instead.




http://votesocialist.org/

Then if Bush wins and declares people like you the enemy you can at least feel good that you didn't vote for that guy who had NOTHING to offer you.

[blm]

19. Amazing that you know so little ....Kerry was the FIRST Senator to submit

gay friendly legislation back in 1985. He also advocated for gays to serve openly in the military, even testifying at a congressional hearing on the record, facing down Jesse Helms.

Kerry helped draft the Hate Crimes bill. Eulogized Matthew Shepphard on the floor of the Senate.

Kerry has been the lead advocate for environmental issues in the Senate. He had the best environmental record of ALL the Dem candidates, including Kucinich.

In addition, Kerry has investigated and exposed more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history. BCCI and IranContra were HIS efforts.

Oddthat you would proclaim that you everything you gathered showed you nothing. It doesn't say much about your gathering skills or grasp of recent history.

[democracyindanger]

20. How do you become a militant pacifist?

That must be a neat trick.

[West Coast Democrat]

26. Maybe it's like that phony "peace activist" in Fahrenheit 911

...the guy who wasn't really a peace activist.

(edited for spelling)

[democracyindanger]

32. I guess you probably have to be on the left

You know, the left.

[no name no slogan]

49. militant does NOT mean violent

nor does 'pacifist' mean 'weakling'.

Gandhi was a pacifist, and although he was meek, his strength helped topple the British Raj in India.

MLK was also a pacifist-- a very STRONG pacifist that could only be brought down by the bullet from a gun. THAT's how strong he was.

You can be strong and be non-violent. In fact, the two go hand in hand, as choosing the violent alternative over peaceful means is a major sign of weakness.

Just look at GeeDubya. And his daddy.

[democracyindanger]

62. That's not how I defined them

:shrug:

But again, I guess I'm just not left enough.

Regardless, notice how the original poster hasn't uttered a word since starting the thread?

<sniff><sniff> I smell...well, you know.

[Snoggera]

21. You'd be funny

if not so pathetically an obvious confabulator.

[sangh0]

23. How about a toaster?......nt

.

[LoZoccolo]

53. Second place is a set of steak knives. n/t

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sangh0]

25. You shouldn't make fun of people who lisp

ie. you're a myth

:evilgrin:

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ulysses]

29. helpful!

:eyes:

[Pastiche423]

38. What she said may not be "helpful"

But she's right on.

[ulysses]

74. hey, Pastiche

I wasn't responding to the poster who started the thread. :)

[Pastiche423]

82. I realized you were not responding to the poster that started the thread

when I responded to your post and before (extremely unfortunately, IMHO) her post (the post you did respond to) was deleted.

While her post was sarcastic, I believe the intent is a very important issue in this election. It's an issue, it seems, that is not allowed to be discussed.

That makes me very sad for the party I was once a member of.

[SoCalDem]

28. So... you LIKE GWB??

That's the choice YOU must make..

Bush is president and will be for 4 more years, if we do not prevail..

Which works best for ya :)

[GreenPartyVoter]

30. Take the 4 years with Kerry and keep after him for

election reform. If you can get ranked voting, you'll be able to vote for whomever you want in '08.

[Zorra]

34. Are you paying attention? At LBN right now, there is an article about how

Kerry has been speaking about de-monopolizing the media. Yesterday there was an article about Kerry speaking about corporate influence in government.

What is the "left"?

People that believe in a Government of, by, and for the People.

And John Kerry is fighting to reclaim that for us at this very moment.

[poliguru]

42. Here's what he offers

There's been some legislation mentioned, so I won't repeat. I will , though, mention the 2 things he has most under his control as President that can help you.

1. Supreme Court appointments. Don't think that's not one of the biggest issues in this election. Rehnquist and O'Connor are about to retire, and the court is now generally split 5-4 on liberal issues. The biggest issue that is going to be in the court in the next few years? Gay marriage, hands down. Not the right to have it (that'll probably be a state issue), but whether other states have to recognize those marriages.

2. Clear headed, non-grudge-holding, coalition building, competent decisionmaking and leadership. We need someone who actually thinks through issues from all angles, seeks expert opinions but knows that "the buck stops here." Civil liberties in particular will truly benefit from that kind of leadership, not just from him directy, but from his cabinet and judicial appointments.

And if for no other reason, to keep Bush out. But I hope the above helped.

[liberalpragmatist]

43. Kerry on Gay Rights

Human Rights Campaign ENDORSES SENATOR JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT: http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Press_Room&CONTENTID=19947&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm

‘From voting against the Defense of Marriage Act to actively opposing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” John Kerry is a true leader for our community,’ said HRC President Cheryl Jacques.

WASHINGTON — The Human Rights Campaign today endorsed Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., for President of the United States. The decision was made by HRC’s board of directors based on the candidate’s support for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality, demonstrated leadership and his viability to win in November.

“From voting against the Defense of Marriage Act to actively opposing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ John Kerry is a true leader for our community,” said HRC President Cheryl Jacques. “Just six months into his first Senate term in 1985, he introduced a gay civil rights bill. His aggressive support for our community continued unabated for the years that followed, demonstrated time and again by perfect HRC ratings on GLBT issues in Congress.”

In 1996, Sen. Kerry was one of only 14 senators, and the only up for re-election, to cast a vote against the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act. He also testified in front of a Senate committee in 1993 against the policy that prohibits military service by openly gay, lesbian and bisexual Americans known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“I want to thank HRC for its endorsement. We have worked together on so many battles and we still have many challenges ahead of us,” said John Kerry. “I know that America finds its strength in the diversity of this great country. I have worked for than 20 years to make sure that LGBT Americans are treated with dignity in our society and equality in our laws. That fight is not over and I will be there for the fights in the future.”

Kerry is a co-sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation, and voted for the bill in 1996. In his Senate office, Kerry has a policy prohibiting discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

“Senator Kerry is one of our strongest advocates against writing discrimination into the U.S. Constitution,” added Jacques. “While we disagree with Senator Kerry on the issue of marriage for same-sex couples, he is firmly opposed to the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would deny our community equality for generations. His opposition stands in stark contrast to President Bush, who has not only endorsed the amendment but is one of its chief advocates.”

Sen. Kerry also:
is a current co-sponsor of the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act, which would add sexual orientation, gender and disability to existing federal hate crimes law;

is a co-sponsor of Early Treatment for HIV Act and supports full funding for science-based HIV prevention programs and the Ryan White CARE Act;

supports giving appropriate authorities the full authority to make decisions on adoption based on the best interest of the child, without bans based solely on sexual orientation;

is a co-sponsor of the Permanent Partners Immigration Act;

and opposes the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, saying he thinks “that any American ought to be able to serve their country if they are physically qualified and able. There were gay people who served in Vietnam. There were gay people who served in World War II, Korea and World War I — and great acts of heroism have been performed by people who are gay.”

***

John Kerry's gay pal (PlanetOut):
http://www.planetout.com/news/feature.html?sernum=920

During his Senate campaign in 1996, John Kerry invited an elite group of gay activists to an elegant dinner at the art-filled Georgetown mansion he shares with his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry...

After Kerry made his pitch, he turned to Heinz Kerry and asked, "Sweetie, do you have anything you'd like to say?"

"Senator, are you talking to me?" interrupted his longtime aide, Jim Jones, who is openly gay.

"Now, Jimmy, don't out me in my own house," Kerry shot back.

The room broke into howls of laugher. Kerry and Heinz Kerry were among those laughing the loudest... (snip)

Elected to the U.S. Senate in 1984, Kerry immediately made his mark by co-sponsoring the Senate's first-ever gay-rights legislation. Since then he has compiled a near-perfect voting record on the issue. Yet GLBT voters, like the rest of the electorate, are eager to learn more about the personal side of the Vietnam War hero and Senate veteran whose formal and patrician bearing often comes across as intimidating. Gays and lesbians bonded instantly with Bill Clinton during his 1992 presidential campaign, but they have been somewhat slower to embrace Kerry.

Few gay politicos know John Kerry better than Jones, who worked in his Senate office from 1994 to 2000. Jones met Kerry while working on the Senate Whitewater investigation. Impressed, Kerry hired him to serve as a legislative assistant. The two have since become close enough to fuel speculation that Jones, Kerry's one-time Senate press secretary, could become the first openly gay White House spokesman if Kerry wins.

Jones considers Heinz Kerry "like a second mother" since the death of his own mother in May, and the first person to call to console him after her death was the presidential candidate himself. "I said, 'Senator, you've got more important things on your agenda right now than calling me.' He said, 'Jimmy, you are family.'"

***

Barney Frank on John Kerry and Gay Rights: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5479064/site/newsweek/

Q. Both John Kerry and John Edwards opposed the constitutional amendment, and they support civil unions, but they draw the line at gay marriage. Isn't that sort of an easy way out?

A. No. Society doesn't get from point A to point Z instantly. In most cases—if you look at the women's movement, civil rights—there's an evolution. Kerry and Edwards have also said that, yes they are personally for civil unions, but they wouldn't prevent a state from ; that's critical. I disagree with the position, obviously, but I think it's reasonable to say there's a difference between being with us 100 percent, 80 percent and zero percent, and that 80 percent is a lot better than zero percent.

[LoZoccolo]

44. Did you even /see/ his speech last week?

Or maybe you should go to his website and read his plan before you decide he "strikes" you as being this or that way.

[liberalpragmatist]

45. John Kerry on Media Consolidation

The Hollywood Reporter: What are your thoughts on media consolidation, and do you believe it has become a problem in the country?

John Kerry: I think it is a serious problem in the country, and I was against the FCC decision and efforts to narrow the ownership of media outlets in America. I think the consolidation of information is a dangerous trend in America because it has the ability to shape our Democracy and shape the flow of information. I believe you need real competition, and you need limitations on that ownership. I have always been in favor of the restraints on the cross-ownership. You know we opened up a little on the radio, and I thought that was appropriate. But look, there have been changes, legitimate changes in the marketplace that reflect real access to information and real access to competition. I am open-minded. I serve on the (Commerce) committee, I have actually voted on these issues, and my record is very clear about favoring real competition, being smart about transitions in the industry that you have to take into account. But I am not going to be hoodwinked into believing that we are in a place today where there is sufficient competition in some of these areas, where we should lift the rules and consolidate, and I am against it.

THR: How has media consolidation affected the political process?

Kerry: Well, look, the loss of equal time requirements, I think was a blow. I was for equal time requirements. Because I think what's happened is that we got networks that are almost providing a single point of view, and I don't think that is wise. The competitive instinct between entities and the bottom line make the courage to carry counterprogramming very difficult for people, and the trend appears to confirm that.

THR: If elected, would you consider more aggressive measures to break up the media conglomerates?

Kerry: Well, I will appoint people to the FCC who have the sensitivities to these issues, and I will certainly have an attorney general and a Justice Department that care about legitimate antitrust considerations in America. You know, Teddy Roosevelt had the courage to take on powerful economic interests as a Republican, and I have shown the courage and willingness to do that as a Democrat, and I would continue to do that as a president. I have a record of standing up against powerful interests that may affect my election or not affect it, but at least I have a record of doing it. I intend to continue to do that. I have voted against any number of inappropriate special interest measures.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/business/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=2077032

[fob]

47. Besides saving the planet and all humanity from a 4 year term of a lame

duck bush*co war orgy? Probably not too much more is necessary in my book. Sorry I only had rhetoric left to answer this time.

[liberalpragmatist]

48. Do You Care About the Supreme Court?

Do you want two or three more Scalias or Thomases? Do you want a hardline radical far-righter to replace liberal justice John Paul Stephens?

Do you want to protect affirmative action? Do you want to uphold Roe v. Wade and abortion rights? Do you want to uphold Lawrence v. Texas? Do you want to protect campaign finance laws? Do you want to ban gerrymandering (defeated by a 5-4 conservative vote earlier this year)?

Do you care about the future direction of the country?

GWB has fortunately not appointed anybody to the Supreme Court. If he has four more years, he will.

[Estragon]

51. well,

I guess it's my own naivete (or just unfamiliarity with these forums) that I didn't expect that much hostility. oh, well.

thank-you very much, to all who wrote sincere/helpful comments.



first off, displacedtexan and others-- I'm 19, from Chapel Hill, NC. So, yeah, this'll be my first big election. I've looked into some of the third party candidates, and I guess it just comes down to what I want to do with my vote-- make a statement of my personal beliefs, or make a more immediate vote for change (even if it's not necessarily the change that I want). Of course, the second's more productive, but I haven't lost all my idealism, yet.

trotsky-- I want a candidate who will really do his damnedest to be a man of the people and a representative of the downtrodden, not just someone who does what he thinks will get him points in polls. (idealism again, yes.)

BLM-- in retrospect, yeah, that was somewhat exaggerated (I got a little carried away, it seems)-- I know Kerry has done good stuff in the past. And that's helpful. I'm just more concerned about what he's going to do now; at least he's said he would vote down a constitutional amendment on marriage. I guess it's not too realistic to expect an all-out advocate of gay marriage to win an election, so he's probably the best there can be, for now.

re: militancy-- I'm not talking about militancy as in war, murder, violence, etc. I do know some people who don't mind maiming a few people to get what they're going for, but that's not for me. Mostly militant advocacy (that is, as loudly as I can, as often as possible) and action (protest, direct action, etc)..

for some reason, I didn't know he voted against DMA. that makes a lot of difference.


sorry to have wasted anyone's time, I'll be quiet now.

:dunce:

[Snoggera]

57. stooge

That's where you lost my interest in assisting you. Calling Kerry a stooge doesn't make sense if you are truly looking for reasons to vote for him.

[blm]

70. It's more than he did good things in the past. HE LED THE WAY

on gay issues when there was nothing to gain politically for him. The same with the environment. He was ostracized and vilified for years in DC for his hard hitting investigations.

THAT'S WHO HE IS. Someone who LED for all the RIGHT reasons. That should be the bottom line for ANY voter.

[Bridget Burke]

90. If you want to "make a statement"--do so!

Take up performance art. Become a mime. Write a song. Express yourself!

I'd suggest you vote for the man who will cause less damage to the country & the world. There's no candidate this year who will magically bring about the leftist utopia. (By the way, who did you support in the primaries?) But if we can avoid more fascists on the Supreme Court & start fewer wars, we can continue to hope for change in the future. Let's try to ensure there will be a future, first.

Do you know any old leftists? There are some, you know. They are in it for the long haul--a constant struggle to remake the world. It's not an easy path, but they fight on & see some improvements. They did not just flirt with trendy ideas in college & then abandon them.

If you continue to save your vote for the perfect candidate you'll wait as long as your namesake.

[Imalittleteapot]

52. "But I don't know how much I want four years of Kerry."

www.johnkerry.com

You have some research to do.:think:

[WilliamPitt]

64. "militant queer radical, feminist, pacifist, semi-primitivist"

You don't want four more years of Bush. You don't want four years of Kerry. You're a "militant queer radical, feminist, pacifist, semi-primitivist," or, in other words, 0.1% of the voting populace.

I mean no disrespect, but perhaps modern American politics doesn't have anything to offer you. Try thinking of ways to direct your passion in positive directions.

P.S. Kerry offers serious environmental reforms, international cooperation, a repair of the Social Security system, energy independence, defense of a woman's right to choose, four Supreme Court nominations that make sense, and a slew of other good things. If this isn't on the militant queer radical, feminist, pacifist, semi-primitivist menu, though, then Kerry isn't for you.

[Imalittleteapot]

87. Great reply Will.

:toast:

[0rganism]

66. I used to be unsure like you, but then I did some research

What can President Kerry do for the left?

How about re-instating the roadless logging ban? Hell, I could vote for Kerry on that basis alone.

How about making the EPA a regulatory oversight organization again, instead of a rubber stamp club for polluters?

How about creating a forward-thinking energy policy with some transparency, instead of operating in the dark to open up ANWR for his donors' drilling pleasure?

Sen. Kerry's got a LOT to offer the environmental left. Now we make him president and see how it shapes up.

[Skittles]

67. LOL

sorry, not buying it

[stevedeshazer]

71. Whether or not you are accurately representing yourself

You have an extremely narrow point of view.

[ASanders84]

72. It's all about PROGRESS

Another 4 years of * will set this country back for generations. Kerry can't openly say everything he truly believes in, that's how politics works. He can to some degree, but regarding liberal social issues...the country is quite conservative today as opposed to 30 years ago. It takes time, Kerry knows that and will see to it that the country is headed in the right direction.

[Swamp Rat]

73. If you don't want 4 more years of Bush vote for Kerry. It's THAT simple.

We can work on perfecting Kerry's admin AFTER Bush&Co are gone. Why would ANYONE from the "center" to the "left" vote for anyone else? Anyone else=4 more years of Bush&Co.

[sendero]

75. I'm sick sick sick...

.. of everyone expecting to be "offered" something. If getting rid of Bush* is not enough for you, then you can go **** ********.

Whine somewhere else, ok?

[QC]

81. People act like their vote is their virginity

and must only to be given to someone who has earned it by swearing to love and honor and cherish them, forever and ever.

I'm sick of it, too.

[arwalden]

77. Sorry. I'm Not Going To Be Begging For Your Vote

You definitely strike me as someone that's smart enough to figure out that any vote (or non-vote) that does not DIRECTLY benefit John Kerry will benefit George Bush.

-- Allen

[JanMichael]

78. Sadly we have little to no choice. Hooray for democracy.

I agree with Greg Palast, Kerry is like a slap to the face whilst Bush is like a brick to the head, big difference even though Kerry leaves much to be desired.

Well actually no, Kerry does not leave much to be desired, America leaves much to be desired.

At least he's not a neo-conchristianreconstructionistcorpo-facistic-lunatic that will lead us into a massive collapse and potential civil war:shrug:

[DaveSZ]

83. As a gay person

How do you think you will fare under chief justice Scalia's court (which will rule for another 20 years or more)? ;)


Scalia met with anti-gay group before Lawrence vs. Texas decision


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1710686

[JanMichael]

86. As a "straight" person I think Bush would make it crap for just about...

...everyone.

Don't need to hear anymore about Scalia, already aware that the man is a f'ing religiofacisticlunatic.

[Octafish]

84. Schools. Jobs. Healthcare. Civil Rights. Environmentalism.

That is what a True Democratic is about.

Check out www.JohnKerry.com. There's a lot of info there.

BTW: A hearty welcome to DU, Estragon. Where ya been?

[DaveSZ]

85. He is a true environmentalist

His record is the best in the Senate, and he's been an environmental advocate for many years.

I agree he's not a socialist though if that's what the op wanted.

[poliguru]

88. Maybe I'M idealistic...

..but it strikes me that some of you are being a bit, um, mean. Really, this poster just put up a simple question, one which clearly we have passionate answers for, and all we had to do was give reasons. Some posters have talked about how they managed to convert people to Kerry's side, and their methods never included stuff like I saw here.

I know I'm going to catch it straight in the ass for saying this, but (deep breath) - you acted like the Repubs we all dislike. Someone ventured a question and an opinion, and that person was treated by several people like a brainless, evil person that will bring down society. So the word "stooge" was there. So what? In reading the whole post it was obviously just a call for information - and a fair one, I might add. Because no matter how small a portion of the population a person might make up, that person still has the right to ask what candidates will do for them. And they should ask. It's a representative democracy.

[DaveSZ]

89. Sorry

I didn't mean to come off that way. :)

It's important to note though, that if Bush picks the next SC, there will be no such thing as "gay rights."

Civil rights laws and the separation of church/state rulings of the past will also be rolled back.

It's important first to protect the progress that we have made from being lost.

The worst thing would be if those 4 little girls killed by the Klan in the church will have died in vain like Rev. Al said.

[JSJ]

91. run right- govern left n/t

[TowelBoy]

92. He'll be getting rid of Bush

At the moment I would take a misshapen canteloupe to Bush. Of course I'm only saying that because canteloupes are stereotypically more open to gay marriage and pro-choice.

[DinahMoeHum]

93. Methinks some timely wisdom from "Granny D" would help. . .

Links:
http://grannyd.com/speech20040724.htm

(snip)
There are many among us who will not support a candidate unless that candidate is perfect on every issue. Politics is about winning. For us, it is about winning to save lives and raise people up from poverty and illness and loneliness and injustice. Those posturing on the left sometimes forget that. Don't tell me that you can't support a particular candidate because of tƒhis or that. This isn't about you and your precious political standards. It is about saving nature and our people. We are coming out to win, so please don't stand in our way. When we have reasonable people in power, let us start our arguments again, for we can not move forward unless we have a decent government underneath us and a Bill of Rights to let us speak freely.
(snip)


"A Challenge to Greens"
http://grannyd.com/speech20040529.htm

(snip)
It is time for the factions of the left to understand that, unless they have a practical strategy for early victory, they stand in the way of justice, of environmental protection, and of peace if they continue to split the progressive vote. If they can actually win elections in some areas, that is a different matter, of course.

If any fellow progressives are in the game only to hear themselves pontificate and wax eloquent about their wonderful values and their brilliant grasp of the issues--while others starve and die, I ask them to join Toastmasters where they can learn to make shorter, less boring speeches and also do no harm in the world. Politics is not about posturing, but about winning and losing and representing the interests of millions of people. When you take up the sword of politics, you play to win on behalf of your people, not to look pretty in your uniform.
(snip)


The rest is up to you. Do not lose heart.

And, BTW, welcome to DU.


:kick: