Attention seems to be turning to Kerry’s lack of service to this country as a Senator of MA – Dick Cheney starts in on examining, and rightfully criticizing Kerry’s Senate record.
Right Voices
in all matter of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Subscribe to Right Voices
How dare they criticize his record in the Senate, I bet someone from the Bush campaign is behind this!
Cheney Admits to Sparse Texas Voting Record
Los Angeles Times
Saturday, September 9, 2000 By MEGAN GARVEY and MARK Z. BARABAK, Times Staff Writers
SHELTON, Conn.–Dick Cheney acknowledged Friday he failed to vote in 14 of the past 16 elections in Texas, hitting the Republican presidential ticket with a new controversy as nominee George W. Bush struggles to gain traction.
Republican vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney’s voting record is under fire — not his 21-year congressional voting record, rather, his voting record as a private citizen.
According to a report by The Dallas Morning News, Cheney has voted only in two of 16 elections held in Dallas County over the past five years.
He did not even bother to vote in this year’s Texas primary election, the one that helped his running mate, George W. Bush, secure the Republican presidential nomination.
Cheney’s reluctance to participate in the democratic process sends the wrong message to Americans. In an era when voter apathy results in less than 50 percent of registered voters participating in presidential elections, it is important for public officials to set the example by voting themselves.
Why should Americans care about voting if their leaders — the ones who live and die by the ballot box — do not?
Businesses do not make routine practice of hiring individuals who show a complete disinterest in their company’s well-being. Why should Americans do so when choosing their leadership?
shiloh, where is your link? I’m not going to warn you again about sources when posting news articles – - I’ll just start deleting your posts that don’t have them, deal?
Now, back to the topic – - do you have an opinon on Kerry’s absence and voting record, at all?
I don’t think Kerry can tell us how he has managed the record he has. Until he ran for President, I really don’t think he realized how dismal it is.
Lisa,
shiloh doesn’t want to admit he’s just schlepping things off of kerry campaign computers.
Next thing you know, shiloh will be posting the dossiers of the Swift Boat Vets as dug up by the private investigators Kerry hired. How very Clintonesque of Kerry.
KERRY CHALLENGES BUSH TO WEEKLY DEBATES: In Anoka, MN, John Kerry challenged President Bush to weekly debates on the issues.
BUSH CAMP REAX: “There will be a time for debates after the convention, and during the next few weeks, John Kerry should take the time to finish the debates with himself. This election presents a clear choice to the American people between a President who is moving America forward and a Senator who has taken every side of almost every issue and has the most out of the mainstream record in the U.S. Senate,” said BC’04 spokesman Steve Schmidt.
“John Kerry should take the time to finish the debates with himself.”
Now that is priceless
KGB- I laughed my ass off when I heard that piece! Classic and true:lol::lol:
LisaS,
from what have read & heard, Kerry’s attendance & voting record sucks. some of it is mitigated, in part that he’s been running for President the last 2 years, and every candidate takes time away from office to pursue another.
being qualified for the office is another subject. it has become standard that we speak of peripheral issues, while ignoring primary ones.
is Kerry less qualified than Bush was in 1998 – 2000 when he took time from governing Texas to pursue the presidency? what in his work or political or military resume was so special that he just leapt to the front of the line?
the sword is always double-edged in such matters.
pcd’s opinion notwithstanding, i am not a rah rah guy for Kerry.
i’m a libra. gotta love the scales.
(sorry about the missing link – oops)
best
Which is why there have been voices from the state of Mass. requesting Kerry’s resignation as Senator. His poor voting attendance record goes further back than the time he’s been campaigning. Be that as it may, even during times of campaiging – he should fulfill his responsibility.
Take a look at Senator Liberman’s voting record during his campaign time — it’s pretty stellar. Senator John McCain’s is too. Campaigning is no excuse.
And I caught your nuance about Bush taking time off from being governor of Texas to campaign – - lucky for him, Governors are afforded time off by having a second in command (deputy) to fill in for them – -not so for Senators. When the Senator has gone missing, the voice of the constituency is not being heard or represented in the Senate.
You seem like a lot of anti-Bush people I know, shiloh. They really have no passion for Kerry-As-Candidate, at all – - where their passion lies is within the “Anyone But Bush” concept.
no one is suprised that Romney & the Massachusetts Republican want Kerry to resign. the good Bay-staters have known his record and have re-elected him.
would Bush have been free to leave the state so often if his Lt. Gov was a liberal democrat? also the ‘weak-Governor’ system rules there, marginalizing the power of the office. no one missed him and he didn’t miss any death-row inmates he could lay his signature on.
.
there are so many reasons for the fellow to go – i stutter.
Shiloh, those that fried, died because they killed innocent people. Afraid that Kerry will be fried for killing unarmed villagers in Vietnam?
Just think folks the same bunch who were calling vietnam vets child killers are abortion supporters such as bill clinton and hanoi jane(fonda)and a lot of other liberals becuase remember waco the branch dividians and what clinton reno did to them the real child killers are the usial bunch of antiwar peace-niks who dont know what peace means in the first place:smile::cool::grin:
Actually, Egret, at the Victory Vigils in San Diego, the so-called Peace activists target children for abuse and terror. Such slime on the left.
You know, Shiloh, that’s an excellent question. Wonder how many times you ask it when looking at Kerry’s track record, meaning his actual track record rather than the track record trumped up by his people?
This door swings both ways. And it’s a door you should ask yourself whether or not you want to see what is behind it regarding the person you support, or rather the person you will wind up with should the person you wish to lose does indeed lose.
In other words, how much do you have to lose under Kerry, given his tendancy as a waffling, no-show wild card?
For the record, answering your question, Shiloh, when a person is being interviewed for a business, it is to see what good he or she would do that business, and whether or not that person would be worth that investment. The same goes for selecting a President, only on a far grander scale: namely whether or not that person would be a worthy investment and good for the country rather than one single business.
That would make the stakes far more higher, wouldn’t you say?
I have a question for you, Shiloh. Why is it that you choose to ignore Kerry’s track record, yet you love to dig up and display every single negative aspect of Bush’s career every chance you get because, hey, the country will be in Bush’s hands essentially?
If you are not completely pro-Kerry here, wouldn’t it make sense to judge them on an equal ratio? After all, one of these two will eventually be leading this country by next year, so shouldn’t we be entitled to the full track record (read: resume) of both? Why should you treat Kerry any differently than you would treat Bush if you were indeed not completely devoted to Kerry?
American Girl -
you ask why i go after Bush, not Kerry. well, you guys have the White House, the House, the Senate, (the Supreme Court)and a majority of govenerships.
you’re the guys right now.
le grande fromage. (sorry for the French)
one goes after POWER to make changes, not the chumps who lost and look like are trying to lose again.
the demonstrators in New York @ the RNC aren’t gonna be democrats, necessarily. they’re Americans who’ve lost jobs, angry about Iraq, the economy, the enviornment, underfunding ‘No Child Left Behind’, underfunding AIDS, angry that 800,000 more children live in poverty since 2000, over a miilion people losing their health insurance and stuff like dat dere.
best
There is a reason the Republicans have all those seats. The voters in the states don’t like the alternative.
Can anyone explain how one is to be taken seriously when one demonstrates naked on the streets of NY?