It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Alternative candidates (not skull and bones)

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmulder
I'm not voting for either Bush or Kerry. I'm voting for Dennis Kucinich and I'm sticking with him. IMO he could be a very good President for this country but he'll never get there. Not as long as the extreme puppet masters are running this country.


Whoa! Hold on there a second. I am a Kucinich constituent in Cleveland, OH and I will tell you firsthand that there are probably less than 2% of his constituents that would put the guy in office. In fact, it's likely that he couldn't get re-elected here if he tried and Cleveland is a Democrat stronghold.

Face it, he is too liberal for even the liberals. His views on certain things are off the charts. Sure, the "Anyone But Bush" fools would support anyone, regardless of their views. They do this without realizing that elections hold consequences... like 4 years of that leadership (Or lack thereof). If you are supporting Kucinich for his anti-war views, I would find that to be rather short-sighted as his other positions are likely to cripple this country's economy.

I would recommend that you research his political history, including his stint as Mayor of Cleveland when he bankrupted the city and led us into default. It's amazing that this guy ever got any political traction at all after that.




posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 10:27 AM
link   
I have read into his political history. In fact, he claims he did not bankrupt the city of Clevland as I'm well aware of the issue. Here is what he said about it in his own words:

"Cleveland never went bankrupt. In fact, I ended up saving the people of Cleveland huge sums of money. Cleveland was in debt in 1977 when I was elected Mayor on a pledge not to sell the city-owned power system, Muny Light. Several banks -- interlocked with the private company that would have become a monopoly by acquiring Muny -- gave me an ultimatum: Sell Muny to that company or they would take the unprecedented step of refusing to roll over the city's debt. I refused to sell. I challenged an Enron-style takeover that would have left city residents powerless. I'm proud of having put principles ahead of my career. As President, I would do the same.

I lost my re-election bid -- but have been fully vindicated since. By saving municipal power, it's widely agreed that Cleveland residents saved hundreds of millions on their electric bills. In five winning elections since I reentered politics in 1994, my campaign symbol has been a light bulb. In 1998, the Cleveland City Council -- which largely opposed my Muny stance in the 1970s -- issued a commendation thanking me for "having the courage and foresight to refuse to sell the city's municipal electric system." Corporations are on notice that, as President, I will put the public interest ahead of corporate greed and power. Voters can decide whether they want a President who is on the side of the Enrons or the broader public."

Are you saying you don't believe what he says there? Furthermore, I like his views on politics much more than Bush or Kerry. That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.



posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrmulder
I have read into his political history. In fact, he claims he did not bankrupt the city of Clevland as I'm well aware of the issue. Here is what he said about it in his own words:

"Cleveland never went bankrupt. In fact, I ended up saving the people of Cleveland huge sums of money. Cleveland was in debt in 1977 when I was elected Mayor on a pledge not to sell the city-owned power system, Muny Light. Several banks -- interlocked with the private company that would have become a monopoly by acquiring Muny -- gave me an ultimatum: Sell Muny to that company or they would take the unprecedented step of refusing to roll over the city's debt. I refused to sell. I challenged an Enron-style takeover that would have left city residents powerless. I'm proud of having put principles ahead of my career. As President, I would do the same.

I lost my re-election bid -- but have been fully vindicated since. By saving municipal power, it's widely agreed that Cleveland residents saved hundreds of millions on their electric bills. In five winning elections since I reentered politics in 1994, my campaign symbol has been a light bulb. In 1998, the Cleveland City Council -- which largely opposed my Muny stance in the 1970s -- issued a commendation thanking me for "having the courage and foresight to refuse to sell the city's municipal electric system." Corporations are on notice that, as President, I will put the public interest ahead of corporate greed and power. Voters can decide whether they want a President who is on the side of the Enrons or the broader public."

Are you saying you don't believe what he says there? Furthermore, I like his views on politics much more than Bush or Kerry. That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.



That's cool! You are more than welcome to believe whatever you wish. However, Kucinich did, in fact, bankrupt Cleveland with his "power play" (pun intended). There were other options for the city of Cleveland in keeping muny power on the grid, but he failed to act which led to the city being in default. Keep in mind, being in default and being bankrupt are two different things. Kucinich's power play lead to the city being in default of tens of millions of dollars, which did lead to bankrupcy. The city was under a budgetary crisis due to a shorfall but was by no means bankrupt when he took office. He was voted in on the premise that he would repair the shortfall, not throw us into default then bankrupcy. He left office in shame.

His "Commendation" is a joke... rewarded to him 15 years post hoc by his own politcal elites from his own party. Were it not for the fact that Kucinich re-entered politics in 1994 when the Democrat encumbent retired, facing an inferior and weak Republican adversary, he wouldn't have stood a chance. Now in his district, 72% Democrat via Census data, he has it locked. He has been virtually unchallenged by any meaningful candidate since that time. His days, however, are really numbered as he has succeeded in letting down his constituents repeatedly over his last term while watching over 64,000 jobs leave just in the last 3 years.



posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 03:34 PM
link   
None of these candidates will be perfect, some will be lousy, but don't you feel the urge to get the power away from the neo cons and the white elite? Why not give your country back to the real people? Are there any?



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I have no idea what a neocon is. Perhaps a cute little term coined by the media establishment? Likely.

As far as the white elite... where does Kerry fit in? Is he not also a white elite? Likely.

Again, this divide and conquer strategy is perpatrated by BOTH dems and Repubs to ensure their complete grasp of power. As long as they can polorize the voting public into one of the two camps, they are guarnateed to remain in control.

Ross Perot scared the hell out of 'em.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by kozmo
I have no idea what a neocon is. .


The age of `neocons'

Neoconservative intellectuals have helped fashion a new ideology for the Republican Party in the arena of foreign policy. Their agenda is simple: to enhance greatly the U.S. military and to use this military power to reshape the world in the image of capitalist democracy.


www.flonnet.com...

These people are not good for the world....



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join