|
Monday, November 01, 2004
What Decides Your Vote?
John Kerry is stumping on the "massive" job losses under President Bush. Bush's tax cuts and pro-business policies have shepherded the economy through a recession, 9/11 and the discovery of corporate scandals that went on all through the 1990's. Yet Kerry blames Bush for the "lack of jobs." Therefore, every American who has a job should vote for Bush. Unemployed people, you should vote for Kerry. That's fair, isn't it?
Kerry claims Bush is not fighting terrorism (which Kerry sees as a matter of law enforcement and legal niceties) in the right way. However, the 9/11 Commission reported that the reason we haven't been attacked again was because of Bush's aggressive pursuit of the terrorists and those who harbor them. So, every American who hasn't been injured or killed in a terrorist attack on American soil in the last three years, please vote for President Bush. Those who have been, go ahead and vote for Kerry (the dead usually go Democrat anyway, along with illegal aliens).
The Senator from Massachusetts wants to raise taxes on those who make $200,000 a year or more in income. President Bush has cut everyone's taxes and will do so again. Everyone who wants to pay lower taxes, or hopes to make over $200,000 a year someday, should vote for Bush. Those who want to pay higher taxes, or plan to remain in a lower tax bracket for life, vote for Kerry.
Kerry's economic plan is to soak the business class for as much as he can squeeze. That can't be good for the market. Anyone who has a penny invested in the stock market, has an IRA or 401K, or owns a part share in any business (or plans to do any of these things) should vote for Bush. The rest of you, vote for Kerry.
Home ownership is at record levels already, and is likely to rise as Bush promotes what he calls an "ownership society." Current or future homeowners should vote for Bush. Anyone satisfied with living in the basements of homeowners might as well vote Kerry.
Married couples with children, who want schools to be accountable to the parents (and want the right to send their children to a different school if they choose) should vote for Bush. Those who engage in uncommitted relationships with multiple partners, believe in using abortion to take care of any "accidents," and agree with forcing parents to send their children to the local public school (unless they can afford a private school) should vote for Kerry.
Anyone who believes that religion is not shameful or disgraceful should vote for Bush. Those who agree with the ACLU's attacks on Judeo-Christian religious beliefs -- like banning Christmas -- should probably vote Kerry, whose votes agreed with the ACLU nearly 3 to 1.
Anyone who actually plans to "marry" someone of the same sex should vote for John Kerry. Those who have no such intention, or who don't think that throwing away the core institution of our society would be a fun experiment, should vote for President Bush.
Some people are influenced by the opinions of others. Those Americans who agree with the opinions of people like Kim Jong Il, Fidel Castro, Jacques Chirac, Kofi Annan, Osama bin Laden, Yasser Arafat, terrorist chiefs in Iraq, George Soros, Michael Moore and Barbara Streisand should vote for Kerry. Those who have more trust in people like Tony Blair, Sylvio Berlusconi, John Howard, Junichiro Koizumi, Vladimir Putin, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mel Gibson should vote for Bush.
The Communist Party USA has endorsed John Kerry for President. Any American who believes in Communism should probably vote for Kerry. On the other hand, any American who owns things he or she doesn't absolutely need to survive (such as a car or house) or has money in the bank is a capitalist pig, and should probably vote for Bush.
Osama bin Laden has released a videotape in which he warns that any state which casts its electoral votes for President Bush will be in danger of attack. Those who want to appease terrorists, go on and vote for Kerry. Americans who want to poke a terrorist in the eye with a sharp stick (metaphorically speaking), vote for Bush.
All Americans who believe that America is a decent country that gives its best to the world, fighting to advance freedom and liberty, should vote for President Bush. Those of you with a "blame America first" view of this country as a looming cancer on an otherwise pleasant world should vote for John Kerry, if you vote at all.
If the American people followed these guidelines, President Bush would get at least 85% of the popular vote.
Posted at Monday, November 01, 2004 by CavalierX
 | | | dave
November 1, 2004 01:08 PM PST
Just for the record Tony Blair does not support Bush's re-nonelection.
But why let the truth get in the way of a good rant! | |
| | | steve
November 1, 2004 01:37 PM PST
If you want to ban Christmas vote Kerry. This blog is great.
The fact that some religious fundamentalists (who believe a man called Jesus walked on water and was the son of god) decided to steal a pagan festival and turn it into a celebration of a supposed virgin giving birth is one thing.
But to suggest that Kerry who is a practising Catholic wants to ban Christmas is another.
What next Turkeys vote for thanksgiving! | |
| | | Luke1
November 1, 2004 01:45 PM PST
I could understand Berlusconi and Mussolini being in the same sentence. But don't you think you are pushing it by putting Kofi Annan and Bin Laden in the same sentence?
Have you got an insider who has seen Osama wearing a vote Kerry badge? Although I must agree Kofi Annan may wish to once again see a U.S. president abiding by international law and therefore secretly wants to see Kerry elected. | |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 01:48 PM PST
>Tony Blair does not support
>Bush's re-nonelection
Try not to strangle on your own rhetoric. Blair supports Bush in the War on Terror, which Kerry would reduce to an episode of CSI: Afghanistan. | |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 01:49 PM PST
>don't you think you are pushing it
>by putting Kofi Annan and Bin
>Laden in the same sentence?
Are you suggesting they don't both want Bush defeated? | |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 01:52 PM PST
>This blog is great.
I don't recollect forcing you here at gunpoint. | |
| | | Jen
November 1, 2004 01:52 PM PST
You must be glad it is not neccessary for voters to follow your Orwellian guidelines to win the majority popular vote. Bush did get the majority popular vote last time.
He just got his brother and daddy to fix it so they could ignore that inconvienant thing called democracy and make him President. | |
| | | AdamK
November 1, 2004 01:57 PM PST
Did the intergalactic aliens tell you that, Jen? | |
| | | jen
November 1, 2004 02:16 PM PST
i know you neo-con have a love for superstition, hocus pocus and other religious fantasy but I didn't think it stretched to flying saucers.
I rather deal with facts | |
| | | AdamK
November 1, 2004 02:18 PM PST
"I rather deal with facts"
Then DO SO, and stop spewing out wacko conspiracy theories that only the terminally stupid would waste brain cells believing. | |
| | | Luke1
November 1, 2004 02:19 PM PST
JM, forced a gunpoint you do seem to have a thing about guns.
However I don't think Bin Laden cares who wins.
I just hope that Kerry does. | |
| | | seneca
November 1, 2004 02:23 PM PST
If i could i will vote for bush, i always vote for politicians that promises to cut the taxes, i am strange to see that in usa people defends socialism, its necessary to implement school vouchers as milton friedman suggests, there is direct relation between economic freedom and prosperity, bush is in the right path, more chicago boys and less michael moore. | |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 02:25 PM PST
An informed, educated voter like you would be welcome here, seneca. | |
| | | Dave
November 1, 2004 02:30 PM PST
I have heard Putin stating that he wants Bush to win, but I definitely haven't heard Blair say he wants Bush re-elected.
You seem to be missing the something as part of the us/uk special relationship or as others see it as a junior partner in the game called imperialism. That is like an obedient poodle most UK prime ministers would go to war along most US presidents so they can get the best scrapes that are usually shared out.
Another thing you are missing is Blair is he leader of the British Labor party who have strong and historic links with the Democrats.
Most of the UK population are against the war, 99.9% of Labor Party members support Kerry and even members of the Conserative party (usually allies of the republicans) are wearing 'anyone but Bush' badges in the Houses of Parliament. | |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 02:35 PM PST
>I definitely haven't heard Blair
>say he wants Bush re-elected
As I said in another comment, Blair supports Bush's method of fighting the War on Terror.
>Blair is he leader of the British
>Labor party who have strong and
>historic links with the Democrats.
Yes, but he is forgiven due to his strong support in our time of need, and his unwavering determination to end terrorism. We can argue about domestic issues after we make sure we still have a civilisation to run. | |
| | | Watcher
November 1, 2004 02:50 PM PST
JM... you forgot to add Yasser Arafat, the Communist Party USA, and Oliver Willis to the list of Kerry supporters.
Luke1... you don't think that Bin Laden cares who wins? Did you even bother to read the transcript of his latest tape? | |
| | | Daz
November 1, 2004 02:53 PM PST
Pagans 4 Bush
As long as he promises to give us our holiday back. | |
| | | Daz
November 1, 2004 02:55 PM PST
Don't you think Christmas is like way too commercial?
Do it the Pagan way and dance naked around a burning bush.
Not you Mr President we love you. | |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 03:07 PM PST
Good call, Watcher. Thanks. | |
| | | milo2020@hotmail.com
November 1, 2004 04:40 PM PST
Anyone who thinks that 1200 dead troops and 100,000+ dead Iraqis is acceptable should vote for Bush, anyone who thinks should vote for Kerry. | |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 04:54 PM PST
Wow, Milo, you would have been great to have around in WWII. You could have subbed for Axis Sally. We lost more soldiers than that in a TRAINING EXERCISE preparing for D-Day. I hate when the Left tries to hide behind military dead. Also, anyone notice that the fake estimates of "dead Iraqis" gets larger by orders of magnitude every day? It was 10,000 a few weeks ago. | |
| | | Jamie
November 1, 2004 07:04 PM PST
Well, Cav, it appears that you have attracted an awful lot of the "chattering classes" on this one. Your blog must have made it onto someone's list somewhere.
Great post!
| |
| | | Jamie
November 1, 2004 07:42 PM PST
Oh, and BTW, Kerry's website says his tax increase starts at $147,750, NOT the $200,000 that he has been promising during his campaign.
But his "tax increase only on the rich" won't affect him, since his primary means of support (the little woman) paid only 12.5 percent in federal taxes — less than the average middle-class family.
Mrs. Kerry's rate is barely above the lowest rate of 10 percent for the lowest-income Americans subject to taxes, where the average middle-class family pays more than 20 percent.
| |
| | | Jamie
November 1, 2004 07:45 PM PST
The Kerrys' golden lifestyle comes complete with five estates, multiple cars, a $3.5 million Gulfstream V jet complete with plasma TV, gold fixtures and two bathrooms, a yacht worth $750,000 to $1 million and servants in every location.
The Kerrys own a $12 million waterfront Nantucket estate, a $6 million mansion in Washington's tony Georgetown, a $12.8 million mansion in Boston's Beacon Hill, a $14 million estate on 90 acres outside Pittsburgh and an $8 million ski chalet near Sun Valley, Idaho.
Its easy to see how he can relate to the problems of the average American citizen. | |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 08:17 PM PST
$147,750?!? In any decent city, that's a working couple's salary, barely manager-level! Independent business owners would be screwed. Kerry's plan would increase the gap between rich and poor, and cut out competition at the basic level. It would ALL be Wal-Mart and megacorporations -- no more small businesses. | |
| | | Jamie
November 1, 2004 10:56 PM PST
Is it true that back in March, the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA)
endorsed Senator John Kerry?
How reassuring is that endorsement?
| |
| | | JM
November 1, 2004 11:19 PM PST
No, that was NARAL, the abortion promoters. Almost as bad as NAMBLA, but at least they just kill the kids outright.
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=28126 | |
| | | Maria
November 2, 2004 06:31 AM PST
I just wanted to comment on steve's remark about Kerry being a practicing Catholic. I have been a Catholic since birth and let me say this - if you are supporting and believing in abortion, you CAN NOT in good, true faith be a Catholic. That's like saying, "Well, I'm with the Pope and God all the way up to the killing babies part.." You can't pick and choose what you want to believe in, you either take it all or none. I love Bush already, but even if I hated Bush, the fact that Kerry uses his "faith" as a way to just pander to people is sickening. How can you spout out all of this about being in good standing with the Church if you not only disagree with one of the core beliefs in the sanctity of life but also work hard to make it easier for people to kill babies. I think anyone, Catholic or not, should be offended by Kerry's attempts to show himself as being a true Christian when it's so clear how much of a hypocrite he is. | |
| | | Maria
November 2, 2004 06:33 AM PST
I am currently out of a job and I'm voting for Bush, I don't blame him for the problems that began in the 8 years prior to his election. | |
| | | Dom
November 2, 2004 06:46 AM PST
As an American neo-nazi and a christian I think it is your God given duty to go out today and vote for our commander in chief G. W. Bush.
Otherwise if we vote for that Liberal loving Kerry we are going to be soon overrun by communist atheist China and those bin laden types.
God spoke to me last night and said be very fearful of Kerry, he doing the devils work. I think you all know what that means? | |
| | | Dom
November 2, 2004 06:46 AM PST
As an American neo-nazi and a christian I think it is your God given duty to go out today and vote for our commander in chief G. W. Bush.
Otherwise if we vote for that Liberal loving Kerry we are going to be soon overrun by communist atheist China and those bin laden types.
God spoke to me last night and said be very fearful of Kerry, he doing the devils work. I think you all know what that means? | |
| | | Steve
November 2, 2004 07:14 AM PST
Maria,
Could you arrange it for all you religious absolutists - Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu fundamentalists could all get to together with your bibles, Torahs and Qurans on some unihabited island and finally have it out.
You could compare notes on who is more hardline on stoning women to death for adultery. Or how many angels could fit on a pin head.
Best of all you could have a fight to the death over whose God/Prophet is the best.
Then you could leave us secularists to get on with the enlightenment and finally leave the medeval dark ages behind. | |
| | | notadraftdodger
November 2, 2004 07:23 AM PST
As an American I believe in the pursuit of happiness for all Americans not just a few.
Are you crazy most hard working Americans can only dream of earning over $150,000 a year. I don't but I would be happy to pay more taxes if earnt that much.
Why should there be corporate welfare for the rich? Millions of jobs are being lost in the U.S. whilst our President has spent billions going to war with a country over imaginery WMD's
It is time for a change vote Kerry! | |
| | | red susan
November 2, 2004 07:25 AM PST
As a member of the communist party usa I urge you not to vote for Bush!
Fellow Americans you have nothing to lose but your chains! | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 07:26 AM PST
Isn't it amazing how these Liberals -- who pretend to be all about tolerance for all points of view -- foam at the mouth in their vicious hatred of religion? At least this one seems to hate a variety of belief systems, although I didn't see him mention Wiccans and Buddhists. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 07:28 AM PST
>most hard working Americans can
>only dream of earning over
>$150,000 a year
And Kerry wants to destroy those dreams. The crushing tax burden on those who rise to that level by starting their own small business would kill them. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 07:29 AM PST
>imaginery WMD's
Yeah, Bush should never have listened to Clinton, Kerry and the UN, each of whom repeatedly stated that Saddam had WMD stockpiles. | |
| | | Steve
November 2, 2004 07:32 AM PST
I am not a liberal, economicaly I am conservative.
I just don't believe wacko religious nuts should be running the country!
There should be a seperation between church and state and we are in danger of becoming a theological state which extremely dangerous.
P.S You can add Buddists to the island if you like, but hey lets leave the wiccans out of it ,as I have never seen a nation of wiccans commit genocide in the name of their god. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 07:38 AM PST
Whatever you call yourself, you have no respect for the beliefs of those who have them. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 07:39 AM PST
>God spoke to me last night and
>said be very fearful of Kerry, he
>doing the devils work. I think you
>all know what that means?
Yeah. Trolling. | |
| | | steve
November 2, 2004 08:22 AM PST
JM, what do you call yourself?
Religion is what it is a belief, a faith.
It is not a science like economics
It is not rational like the rule of law
It has no place in U.S. government. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 08:24 AM PST
I'm agnostic, but that doesn't mean I have to be antagonistic. | |
| | | alex
November 2, 2004 08:28 AM PST
Wow, I never thought someone could be such an ass, as to completely turn their head toward innocent lives being lost in Iraq. They signed up for the army, not to sit in the desert and die in order to fulfill some war-crazy ape's wet dream.
I'm not a democrat, either. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 08:35 AM PST
>some war-crazy ape's wet dream
No need to insult Saddam; he's already sitting in a jail cell. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 08:40 AM PST
Comment deleted. Trolls are not allowed here. | |
| | | steve
November 2, 2004 08:52 AM PST
agnostic - I looked up in the word in the dictionary; one who holds that we know nothing of things outside the material.
Well you could of just said you don't believe in God!
The church and the state should be separate. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 08:53 AM PST
>I looked up in the word in the dictionary
It appears you looked up athiest by mistake. Try again. | |
| | | steve
November 2, 2004 08:58 AM PST
Well that is what it says in the Collins English dictionary.
What are you scared of it is not like neo-cons to sit on the fence. It is not like you are going to burn in hell. | |
| | | Trolls
November 2, 2004 09:04 AM PST
Trolls 4 Kerry
Do I note a little bit of authoritarian
censorship in the land of the free. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 09:07 AM PST
>authoritarian censorship
This is my blog, not a public square. Trolls are not welcome. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 09:12 AM PST
>Well that is what it says in the
>Collins English dictionary.
Best throw that trash out, then. There are many ideas of what agnosticism is. Here's Bertrand Russell's, although I don't agree with his point of view 100%:
http://www.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/humftp/E-text/Russell/agnostic.htm
And here's something about T.H. Huxley, who invented the word:
http://azaz.essortment.com/agnosticdefinit_rmak.htm | |
| | | Maria
November 2, 2004 09:29 AM PST
Steve,
My arguement is not that the Church and the State should be together as one. I am simply stating that if you are going to use religion to boost your campaign, it's always a good idea to not be a hypocrite IF you truly belive in said religion. It's hypocritical to be all acting like he's such a good Catholic, when he isn't. It isn't about a particular faith. I would vote for a strong leader of good morals and beliefs no matter what faith she or he subscribed to, I just think it is a sad thing to see people believing Kerry's act that he gives a damn about morals. Maybe you think abortion is an ok solution to being careless (I do not mean to say that it isn't ok in certain cases), but I don't, and I think it's an insult to any person with half a brain and sense of morality to see Kerry acting like he is something that he clearly is not. | |
| | | Maria
November 2, 2004 09:43 AM PST
Also, please realize that the founding fathers were seeking to keep the Church (in that case, the Anglican Church of England) from becoming the sole form of faith accepted by the government. The United States began with people searching for freedom from religious persecution. The founding fathers, were not, countrary to what some liberals want you to think, in favor of a completely politically correct government with no foundation in basic morals and a sense of right and wrong. These things are not denomination or faith specific.
What all of this between Bush and Kerry comes down to is whether you wish to vote for someone who can recognize the basic differences between good and evil and take a stand against acts of terrorism. That's not about a certain faith or religion. It's not about whose "God" is better than the others. It's not a holy war. I do not think one faith is supreme over all others. I am voting by listening to the facts and my conscience, I apologize if this makes me an "religious absolutist." No, wait, I don't. Right and wrong should influence a leader's decisions. I don't want a President who panders to everyone, I want a President who has the ability to recognize "hey, that's not right.." and the guts to take a stand and do something. But, hey, what do I know? I am sitting here in the "medieval dark ages." ;) | |
| | | steve
November 2, 2004 10:59 AM PST
Maria,
A woman's right to choose was upheld by the US constitution.
Why should a religious zealot try and stop that?
I don't think any woman thinks hey i'll be careless tonight and get pregnant.
How about teaching about sex and contraception in a mature and healthy way like Holand does.
Holland has the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy in the western world.
Or would you rather teach kids sex is a sin and that condoms have holes in them. Talk about burying your head in the sand.
Don't you get it religion is part of the problem not the solution!
| |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 11:21 AM PST
>Why should a religious zealot try
>and stop that?
Umm... because killing unborn children is not right. In over 95% of abortions, that "choice" should have been exercised before pregnancy began. Using it as a contraception technique is plain wrong.
| |
| | | steve
November 2, 2004 11:21 AM PST
maria,
why did bush talk about a crusade?
1. Because he is a half wit?
2. He wants to alienate muslims?
3. Or all of the above?
What is the difference between a crusade and jihad?
An unending war on terror - what does that mean. The neo-cons have us all living in fear and then they find easy to control us.
Before it was the reds under the beds. Now it is the muslim bogey man.
Remember the Romans used to control the population by always talking of the threaten from the barbarians. And look what happened to the Romans- overstretch and political corruption led it to self -implode.
Look at Israel and Palestine violence begets violence.
Sooner or later you have to deal with the reasons why so many people want to join in a jihad. Northern Ireland has years of war has been peaceful for many years now | |
| | | steve
November 2, 2004 11:33 AM PST
As per usual JM shoots off his month without thinking!
An embryo is not an unborn child.
Secondly JM convienently ignores the fact that most religions including Christianity depicts sex as sinful and only for procreation.
What about sex education and less talk about rubbish, such as condoms have holes in them. | |
| | | steve
November 2, 2004 11:37 AM PST
I don't about your 95% of abortions diatribe.
However what are you trying to imply that the 'other 5%' don't have a choice.?
Do you mean women who have been raped or girls who have been sexual abused?
Well the Catholic church and the Evangelicals still think all abortions are a sin and should be illegal.
| |
| | | sarah
November 2, 2004 11:51 AM PST
You bushites do get over emotional when you talk about the unborn child when it is infact an embryo.
And to think it is usually you who claim us Liberals are too emotional.
Bless. | |
| | | steve
November 2, 2004 11:58 AM PST
The world according to Maria,
In the beginning there was nothing and god said let there be light. What because he wanted to see nothing.?
Other tall Christian bible stories;
The world was created in 6 days
The world is flat
The sun rotates around the earth.
The earth is about 6,000 years old.
God created man and evolution does not exist.
Mary was a virgin
what a great work of mediterranean fiction
| |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 01:56 PM PST
>An embryo is not an unborn child.
Yes, it is. If not at conception, then when does that magical transformation occur, when the genes suddenly becoma human genes? | |
| | | Kenny
November 2, 2004 02:02 PM PST
"you talk about the unborn child when it is infact an embryo"
Emotion has nothing to do with it; logic and science has everything to do with it. At the moment the egg is fertilized, the embryo/fetus/child has a unique human genetic identity which never changes all its life. If you can point to the exact moment when it stops being "a collection of cells" and becomes human, and back it up with scientific evidence to prove that there's some kind of genetic alteration, then you have a case to make. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 02:04 PM PST
>Well the Catholic church and the
>Evangelicals still think all
>abortions are a sin and should be
>illegal.
Ahh, but I am not arguing from a religious standpoint, am I?
| |
| | | Nick
November 2, 2004 04:42 PM PST
Very funny Steve. Way to show your ignorance. Saying that those are tall tales is false. First off, who said that the sun revolves around the earth? Who said that the earth is flat? Those are not religious beliefs, just so you know. The bible doesn't say that. Also, Evolution is just a theory, like anything else. And, unlike other valid theories, it is disproven by science. The laws of thermodynamics and a term called entropy disprove evolution from its source of randomness. No laws disprove that there is a god.
Good job believing the Davinci Code, which is FICTION, by the way. If you were going to believe a book, why not the bible?
On another note, its great to see another typical show of the "accepting liberal" not accepting something because they don't agree with it. | |
| | | Nick
November 2, 2004 04:43 PM PST
Also, great post, cavalier. It's great when logic is used to flush out the truth. | |
| | | seneca
November 2, 2004 05:56 PM PST
Cavalier x, did you receive the photos that i sent you about comunism atrocities. | |
| | | JM
November 2, 2004 07:41 PM PST
Thanks, Nick. If just ONE person saw it before he or she voted and stopped to THINK first, I'm glad. Seneca, those pictures were, to be blunt, horrible. Communists have no respect for human life whatsoever. | |
| | | seneca
November 2, 2004 08:25 PM PST
Who is going to win, i dont have good information. | |
| | | Jamie
November 3, 2004 01:10 PM PST
Unless he pulls an Al Gore stunt, Kerry has called President Bush, conceding defeat and congratulating him for winning re-election. He is to officially concede at 2:00 P.M. EST. | |
| | | seneca
November 3, 2004 03:49 PM PST
Congratulations, cavalier x, please make me a favour, tell bush to send to hell spanish socialists, today mr aznar is happy so do i. | |
| | | Joe Mariani
November 3, 2004 07:51 PM PST
My name is Joe Mariani. I am a computer professional from the Philadelphia area. Really. What are the odds! I was pointed to your article on Chronwatch by a coworker who thought I should have a look. I looked at it.
Goodbye. | |
| | | JM
November 3, 2004 11:48 PM PST
Hmm, he didn't seem too impressed or anything. So why leave a message? It's a mystery to me. | |
| | | Jamie
November 4, 2004 08:36 AM PST
Must be a Democrat.
I'm thinking that there will be a lot to write about for the next four years. Kerry will go back to the Senate, where he will join John McCain (another man who lost to Bush). There, they can work together to irritate the president every chance they get, but in a "bi-partisan" way. After all, they are such great friends. | |
|
|
