So Many Choices; let's make sure we make the right one

[cjmastaw]

When It comes right down to it, it is obvious that we will be taking over the white house again. (woo hoo) But let us make sure we don't end up with the democratic equivalent to Bush. While the war is the main interest we all share, and want it to end, let us not forget the civil liberties we have lost due to Dictator Bush. While any democratic candidate is likely to win the election, we must not screw up the decision of which candidate that is. We must not rely solely on the media to help us make that decision. We must ask the questions of these candidates and make sure their "true" answers are known to all. This is what I want to know.

1.I want to know which candidate is going to end the warrant-less wiretapping.

2.I want to know which candidate is going to restore habeas corpus.

3.I want to know which candidate is going to give back powers in the patriot act that allows a president to cancel or postpone elections.

4.I want to know which candidate is going to stop reading my mail.

The only candidate worthy of being president, at least in my humble view, is the one willing to do all these things. It is our responsibility to make sure this time that we get the right guy in there. We cannot afford another Kerry, because that just means we'll end up with another Bush.

[bonito]

1. And I wish they'd start talking about those issues now.

These issues would make any one of them stand out.

[blm]

2. Kerry and Bush couldn't be further apart. Bush is the most corrupt president in

modern history.

Kerry has uncovered, investigated and exposed more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history. He uncovered IranContra, BCCI, illegal wars in Central America, and CIA drugrunning.

Kerry is also the leading lawmaker on open government issues and weighed in heavily against imperial presidencies by going to court against Bush1 to get the PDBs turned over.

If it hadn't been for Kerry uncovering IranContra and BCCI, this country would be well into its New World Order brand of fascism by now.

Where did you get the idea that Kerry and Bush are alike?

Here is what the Federation of American Scientists had to say, especially on the issue of SECRECY.

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2004, Issue No. 95
October 30, 2004

KERRY ON OPENNESS AND SECRECY
BUSH ON OPENNESS AND SECRECY
KERRY ON OPENNESS AND SECRECY
Though it has gone largely unremarked by supporters and opponents alike, John Kerry has an extraordinary Senate record as an investigator and overseer of some of the government's most controversial, complex and secretive activities.
He has repeatedly exposed abuses of the government secrecy system, and has often prevailed in overcoming unwarranted secrecy.
One high point of his Senate career is his chairmanship of the Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, which culminated in a 1200 page final report in 1993.
Perhaps it is a sign of the anemic state of American democracy that this monument of government accountability is out of print and forgotten. But it is a remarkable document -- lucid, passionate and decent.
Among other things, the Committee report is a testament to the power of openness and declassification and to clarify and to heal.
The Kerry Committee's achievements included "the most rapid and extensive declassification of public files and documents on a single issue in American history" as of 1993.
A decade before the 9/11 Commission wrestled with the White House over access to the President's Daily Brief, members of Senator Kerry's committee sought and gained limited access to PDBs in the first Bush Administration.
"Nothing has done more to fuel suspicion about the government's handling of the POW/MIA issue than the fact that so many documents related to those efforts have remained classified for so long," the Kerry Committee report concluded.
"The Committee believes that its legacy will be that it removed the shroud of secrecy which for too long has hidden information about POW/MIAs from public scrutiny."
Though it pulled few punches and displayed a willingness to find fault with individuals and agencies inside and outside of government (and to praise others, such as then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney), Senator Kerry's Committee was still able to function effectively on a bipartisan basis.
Of course, the policies of a hypothetical President Kerry cannot be reliably predicted based on the practices of Committee Chairman Kerry.
But it is noteworthy that as a Senator, Kerry demonstrated an exceptionally vivid understanding of the pitfalls of executive branch secrecy and the essential function of government accountability in a democracy.
The executive summary of the 1993 Report of Senator Kerry's Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs may be found here:
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1993_rpt/pow-exec.html
Chapter 4 on Intelligence is posted here:
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1993_rpt/pow-chap4.html
BUSH ON OPENNESS AND SECRECY

The documented increase in government secrecy under President Bush is partly driven by the heightened state of security associated with military action and the threat of terrorism. But it also reflects a seeming disdain for public deliberation and official accountability that predates September 11, 2001.
The President's secrecy policies are within the parameters of the law and the Constitution -- with the exception of the refusal by the CIA and the Justice Department to release historical intelligence budget information, which violates the Constitutional statement and account clause, we believe.
But Bush Administration secrecy places a premium on strong executive branch authority at the expense of congressional oversight, freedom of information and even such mundane things as making the President available to answer questions from the press. As a result, the character and the possibilities of citizenship in our democracy are increasingly constrained.
In a small but telling example, the telephone directory for the Department of Defense, which for many years used to be for sale at the Government Printing Office Bookstore, has been deemed "for official use only" in the Bush Administration and is no longer available. A wall between the public and its government that did not previously exist has now been erected.
(The White House's own telephone directory is also stamped "for official use only," though it may be purchased by anyone for $35 from the private Bureau of National Affairs. Meanwhile, the Department of Energy, which handles information and materials as sensitive as any in government, makes its telephone directory available on the web.)
Many of the Bush Administration's official policies and pronouncements on secrecy may be found here:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/index.html
A recent, mostly critical discussion of Bush Administration secrecy policy is presented in "Groups raise concerns about increased classification of documents" by Gregg Sangillo, National Journal, October 23:
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1004/102704nj1.htm
******************************
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists.


There are serious consequences that occur when any Democrat closes the books on corruption and allows secrecy and privilege to prevail.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

[Blue_In_AK]

3. Keep fighting the good fight, BLM.

I couldn't agree with you more.

[cjmastaw]

4. HUH? What are you talking about?

I didn't say Kerry and Bush were alike. I said we cannot afford to have another Kerry running for president... We need to win. No doubt he has done many great things for this country, and no doubt he and Bush are nothing alike, but Kerry is not electable. His time has come and gone; he blew it. Not that Ohio was his fault, but if he would have handled things better, meaning the bad pr blitz from faux news and the bush propaganda machine (I know they are pretty much the same thing) He would be the pres right now. That being said, we need a candidate who doesn't trip all over their tongue. That is all I was saying. I think Kerry is a great "senator" But that is all he's ever going to be.

[blm]

5. Kerry WON his matchups with Bush. How did the DNC do in their job of securing the election process

for the four years they were charged with doing so?

How did the left media do matched against the RW machine?

Was the DNC as organized in every state as the RNC was? Did the Office of Voter Integrity make sure to counter the 4 years of vote suppression, rigged machines, and purged voter rolls tactics that the RNC employed for 2002 and 2004?


The DNC's targetted state strategy lost 2000, 2002, and 2004. Dean has worked his ass off the last two years to rebuild the party infrastructure to mount the same 50 state strategy that the RNC had in place since before 2000.

[cjmastaw]

6. Count to 10... Breathe

Look, I don't know what your deal is. I like Kerry... As a senator. He is a good senator. But he has no balls. He makes statements that the GOP just misconstrues and eats up, then he has no rebuttal. It's time to stop being so soft. We need a candidate with some edge/attitude and quick wit who knows how to handle themselves when in the cross-hairs.
Like I said... I LIKE KERRY... AS A SENATOR.
STOP MAKING THIS TO BE SOME "KERRY HATE"
I understand you were obviously a HUGE Kerry fan; I voted for him too, but he made some KEY mistakes and wasn't sharp enough to compensate. So just get off it already. He is NOT electable as a president. He IS a good SENATOR.

[cjmastaw]

7. Oh by the way...

By the way; IF HE WON HIS MATCHUPS HE WOULD BE PRESIDENT (EXCEPT FOR OHIO, WHICH BUSH STOLE)

[blm]

10. The RNC stole Ohio and other states. The DNC had 4yrs to stop it and didn't.

it is not ALL about one person at the top of the ticket. Kerry beat Bush there in all of their one on one matchups. It was the RNC and RW media that dragged Bush across the finish line.

Seriously - why do you think Dean had to work so hard these last two years rebuilding what had been left to collapse in the years before? Do you really think that Bush WON on his own and Kerry lost on his own? Dean's DNC's 50 state strategy won 2006. The old DNC's targetted state strategy lost 2000, 2002, 2004.

Do you think Kerry's very few verbal mentions that were twisted were somehow more egregious than the HUNDREDS of verbal gaffes Bush made, or did the RW media just exploit them better because they were an overwhelming force compared to what the left had access to?

BTW - I am not being combative - I am posting these comments and questions in a straightforward way. I am always curious to the full thinking behind a comment.

[demo dutch]

8. I want a candidate who CAN deal with the situation in the Middle East! and the rest of the world!

because if the world gets blown to pieces the domestic agenda doesn't really matter now does it!

[cjmastaw]

9. Yeah

That was the first thing I mentioned, but aside from that, I think we are entitled to get our civil liberties back. I think all the candidates are in agreement that the war in Iraq has to end, and we have to keep W's finger off the Nuke button before he blows away Iran.