Edwards Drops Out Of The Race

[StPaulieGirl]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/02/elec04.prez.main/index.html

God help us.

[Kitty C.]

Like I told you before, SPG.  Something about Kerry just doesn't set well with me and I think Edwards would have a better shot at defeating Bush than Kerry.  And after you posted that info on Kerry's 'military career', it just makes me that much more uneasy.

And even if Edwards became his running mate, I don't know if it would change my mind.  Looks like it's gonna be another general election where I'll be forced to vote for the lesser of two evils.  I HATE that........

[richiejay]

I ALWAYS find it be the lesser of two evils....

[StPaulieGirl]

Well more and more vets are speaking out about Kerry's "inaccuracies", but I don't know if it will do any good.  Inquiring minds would like to see his medical records to know  how you can pick up 3 Purple Hearts in a 4 or 5 month tour of duty, without  any lasting physical damage.  

I read last night that Hillary now supports Kerry.  Interesting how she stood on the sidelines and waited until the nomination was clinched.  

My son in law is a conservative Democrat, and I've been passing information about Kerry's anti war activities and also printed out that article about Edwards, because no one knew a darn thing about Edwards.  When I told him last night that Edwards had dropped out, I also mentioned that the medals that Kerry tossed over the White House fence weren't even his.  It was a publicity stunt.  My son in law was raised conservative, and he was an Eagle Scout.  He looked a little sick hearing that.

I know he doesn't want to vote for Bush, but Kerry scares me.  He is quoted as saying that he would like our troops under the UN.  I don't think so!  I'm not going to get into an argument with him about it, unless Kerry picks 'she whose name cannot be mentioned'.  Then I'll scream like a scalded cat!

So now the speculation of who he will pick for running mate starts.  I have two major problems with Bush.  The big one is the illegal immigrant legislation, the other is that blasted "No Child Left Behind" BS.  However, I will vote for him.  He has a lot of good points going for him.  Ask our new Haitian cheerleading squad ;-)

I hated voting for Arnold instead of Tom McClintock, but I did it :-(

[joni]

that the other democrats dropping out of the race are NOT endorsing Kerry?  That speaks volumes to me.

[StPaulieGirl]

I don't know why they haven't jumped on the bandwagon.  I believe that Edwards said something towards Kerry's candidacy when he dropped out.  It's too bad that he didn't get enough support.  Edwards seems like a decent guy.

[richiejay]

" He has a lot of good points going for him" ?????
 I don't see it beyond the dozen or so he doesn't have going for him.  The new 9/11 ads pushed me over the edge on this guy.  He is using the fear of the American people for his political gain.  "Look how I responded after the 9/11 attacks"..  It happened on YOUR watch moron!!! Then he blames the Iraq "misinformation" on intelligence reports.  Well, why aren't these guys getting fired.  They gave bad information right? Enough bad information where HUNDREDS of kids are getting killed.  Frankly, I don't buy it.  I think he is lying about all of it.  
 Oh, did you know he is trying to privatize air traffic control, too?  The people that screen your luggage are now federal workers, but those darn air traffic controllers (who unprecedently landed EVERY airplane on 9/11 in under 2 hours....and worked the northest blackout without so much as a hiccup)...they don't deserve to be under the federal umbrella any longer. Do you want your airplane in the hands of a private business as opposed to the federal government?  Throw in that he has spent more money than any president EVER..that the deficit will be larger than any other time in History, that nearly every other country in the world now views us as arrogant militants.  And that's only what he has done in the past three years.  If he's elected again, maybe he can continue to add to the list....

[StPaulieGirl]

If it hadn't been for Clinton blowing off the first World Trade Center bombing, the OKC bombing, the USS Cole, and the embassy bombing, then ignoring THREE OFFERS to get Osama Bin Laden....there might not have been a 9/11.  Oh wait, he did respond!  He deployed a couple of Cruise missles and nailed an aspirin factory....not because he was concerned about our security, he got busted with Monica!

Bill Clinton knew about Bin Laden and Al Qeda, and didn't give a shit.  George W inherited not only Clinton's appointees, but also 8 years of malfeasance from Clinton's watch.  Of course he's going to trust intel, because he didn't know the how deep the problems actually were.  You're right, they all should be fired.  Many of us don't understand why George W. didn't fire every single Clinton employee when he took office.  

So what if he's going to privatize air traffic control? I remember when Reagan fired their asses.  Are you an air traffic controller?  On one hand you're complaining about how much money the Bush administration has spent, then complain when he wants to privatize a small part of the government.  The only countries who view us as arrogant militists are France and Germany.  Cheese eating surrender monkeys and unrepentant anti semites.  Ohhh noooo, they're mad at us!  We know who our allies are.  Great Britain, Spain, Poland, Australia, and Japan, just to name a few.

So I guess you'll be voting for John Kerry.  Whatever....

Btw, I can back up the Clinton stuff.  Just say the word...

[richiejay]

I love people like you...blame someone else for what happened...don't take any responsible.  "Hey, it wasn't MY fault.  The guy before me screwed up".  Oh, yeah..that goes real far.  As far as air traffic control...maybe you don't care.... but you might when you are on one of the planes that crashes.  Yes, I'm complaining when he wants to privatize a vital government-inherent job but then spend millions on the TSA.  That makes sense.  Get rid of the ones that have a bottom line of safety.  Bringing up Reagan "firing their asses" makes sense too.  Because that, of course, is relevant in this discussion.  NOT!!  Do you have the knowledge to back that up?  I think not.  My message was about George W and his moronic, inept presidency and you come back with Bill Clinton stuff.  That makes sense.  Sounds like you need to let go of the past....

[oklahoma]

My husband has been saying the exact same things for months!!  We live in an ultra-liberal wanna-be mini-Berkeley town.  Especially on campus, my husband is faced with fools who spout off on so many issues, without any facts to back them up.  He is very well-informed and gives the facts to those who may be lacking.

I personally think the greatest thing Bush has going for him is that if he says he will do something, you know it will happen.  Even if you don't agree with what he says, at least you know where he stands and that he will follow through--more than what you can say about most politicians......

BTW, the past is VERY relevant to the present and the future.  To say otherwise is complete ignorance.  I personally visit this website because what my husband did in the past (marrying his ex-wife) intensely affects my present and future.  It's not an excuse, but it is a way to understand things and to try to improve.