Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I like Deans aggressiveness. I'm in PA where we have a late (Apr) primary.

We are a big state but theres a chance that it will be decided by then.
I want to win this election in the worst way. However, sometimes I find myself
thinking I would rather have Dean lose while attacking on all fronts than sleepwalk
through another long hot Summer and lose anyway.

Tha'ts why I'm glad Gephardt quit. He's a decent man no doubt but he needs energy.
I hope Kerry can energize himself. Eight years of Bush will be a disaster.

Max Music

 Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

 Hi Bartcop,

 This is my first election year in Little Rock.  I figure we have a primary,
but I don't know when.  I reckon I will vote for Howard Dean.  I like Clark,
although I view that his life has been spent in the bureaucracy of the
military, where competence is sometimes hard to discern and sycophancy is a
virtue.  We have not had any evenly matched enemies to test against,
militarily.  Kerry has been a reasonably good Senator, and I hope I can vote
for him without remorse in the general election if I have to.  Dean has been
the only candidate that has expressed little respect for Bush, and that
reflects my level of respect for Bush.  Chris Matthews interviewed him
tonight, and Pat Buchanan asked a question.  I thought Dean handled them
both perfectly.

 The thing that pisses me off the most is that the media, which ought to be
covering the race within the context of the decision of voters; conveying
the opinions and positions of the candidates, is trying to manipulate the
outcome.  We hear little about issues, they are covering a sporting event.
I want more time given to the candidates, and less time given to the
lamebrained conjectures of the media stars.

 There is little hope for improvement, because of the endemic corruption of
the system.  Elections are a cash cow for broadcasters, and there are no
restrictions on pricing for advertisements.  So the same companies that
collect money from candidates control the editorial content of news
programs.  In some cases these are the same companies that profit from the
spending decisions of government.  It isn't a fair system.  It is designed
as a test of which candidates can collect the most money from contributions
and buy the most effective advertisements.  This reflects the concentration
of wealth and income in the country, which is very highly skewed toward the
wealthy.  Making it better is a daunting problem.

 The apparent solution is giving candidates free time, taken out of that
right of licensure that makes up the arbitrary power that is government.
Just make the stations donate the time, not even with a preset limit.  I
won't hold my breath while I wait for the politicians that benefit from the
money loaded system to change the way business is done.

Charlie Robinson

 Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

 First, I wouldn't be sending this to you if I didn't think I had something significant to add to the discussion.

I originally supported Dean strongly, because he seemed appropriately outraged about the BFEE's machinations.

After Kerry won the Iowa caucus, I took this quiz:
<< >>
and discovered Kerry actually claimed to hold more liberal positions than Dean, so I was happy to see him pull ahead.

But upon further reflection, although I'd always maintained that anyone other than Lieberman, who'd only succeed in getting
the Democrats blamed for the Republican policies he would follow, would be preferable to Bush... I've just had a bit of an epiphany.

Even if a "Tutu-wearing" Democrat wins the White House, whoever it winds up being is going to "see the books" once they
take office. And I'm confident that anyone who isn't worshiping the GOP's "ends justify the means" PNAC dogma, no matter
how reasonable they think the Republicans are now or in the past, is going to be horrified and sickened (or "shocked and awed"
if you will), when they see what's actually been going on. They're going to see where the money's been going, they're going to see
the deals that have been made, they're going to see the cover-ups which have taken place. And they're going to see what has to
be done to fix things. And their going to realize that they can't do their job without telling the American people what they've learned,
no matter how badly it reflects on the previous administration, or the millions of people who were fooled by it's lies.

So I don't care who wins. Any Democrat will have no other choice than to expose the corruption, and set things right as well as
they can. And even if Bush wins, his Ponzi-scheme approach to American dominance will collapse long before his term expires.
Either way, America is going to know a hell of a lot more of the truth than they do now. And that, will be the end of Neo-conservativism.

Rex Devious

 Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I don't agree with the idea of voting based only on the issues.  There's really no point if your candidate cannot win.
I like Kucinich, but he seems a little wacky sometimes, a little timid other times, and it's obvious that he's only there
for his ideas.  Does anyone honestly expect him to win?

Although I like Kucinich's ideas, what I have wanted in a Democrat more than anything over the last four years has been balls.
The General stepped up and showed Bush and Rove how to use the phrase "bring em on."  His ideas are sensible, he is articulate
(though he's got a stiffness that betrays his past as a general), and very direct.  As far as I can tell, he is not afraid of any issue.

As a moderate liberal myself, I identify with Clark, and I admire his courage and focus against Bush.
It seems so many others favor Clark, I just don't understand how he hasn't done better so far.

Here's hoping for better performances in the south...


Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

Can’t help but think of “Baghdad Bob” when listening to Joe Lieberman.  He finished a distant 5th place
in the NH primary and is still declaring victory.  What a frigging moron.  Remember Baghdad Bob?

He was the Iraqi dude they showed on the news all the time constantly telling everyone what a beating
the U.S. was taking on a daily basis in terms of defeats and casualties.  I don’t know what the hell Gore
was thinking by choosing this little republican idiot as his running mate.  Carrying Lieberman was a heavy load for Gore.

Speaking of Baghdad Bob, I still admire the courage the Iraqi people showed.  They had nothing but still stood
courageously in the face of the mighty U.S. military.  Too bad George Bush didn’t have that kind of courage in
defending his country in it’s time of need in Vietnam.  He’s pretty brave now that he sits behind the desk of the
oval office with bodyguards surrounding him at every step.  He’s a coward-assed bastard.

He deserves to be getting the treatment Saddam is enduring.  Their positions should be reversed.  That Iraq deal is
such a sad and shameful part of our history.  The Dixie Chicks had it right all along.  I agree with you.  If Bush’s actions
don’t fall under the heading of “High Crimes of War” I don’t know what does.  Sadly, there’s no way we can impeach
him before he has a chance to get out of office.  Sadly, he will get away with everything and never have to go to jail.

The most we could hope for is that we never have to pay him a $400,000 yearly salary with secret service and full
benefits for the rest of his life.  The SOB is young and healthy and will sadly probably live to be as old as Reagan
or Bob Hope.  Why should we have to pay for someone that has already cost us such shame and generations of debt?

G. Cole

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I hate to state the obvious,but I'll vote for ANYONE who has the chance
to move into the White House.....I don't care if he has a sexual preference
for smelly pygmy goats, and shoots heroin directly into his skull.,
he would still have higher morals ( and be more human )..than the GOP!


Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

What we need to aim at should stay republican fear, while we leave the in-fighting between Democrats out.

We should pick a ticket that scares the living merde out of republicans.  Senator Kerry and General Clark
immediately suggest themselves as just that ticket.  The General and the Brown-water Sailor seem to me
the right pair to shove a rolled-up "Mission Accomplished" banner where it belongs, joining the unelected
chickenhawks at the hip and sending them back to Texas.   Partly to avoid charges of Naval parochialism
and partly because he stands a better chance of kicking Bush in southern parts, I'll vote for Clark, but I like them both.

Bones in NM

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

DEAN for President. Fiscally conservative, socially progressive.
No fucking Bonesman (Kerry / Bush) in the white house,
It is time for a little passion.


Jack Gianola

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I am 19 years old and this will be my first presidential election.
Dennis Kucinich is by far my favorite candidate, but he won't get the nomination.

I like Howard Dean as well, but I don't think he can beat Bush.  I will vote for John Kerry,
and I think he should pick Wesley Clark as a running mate.  A decorated lieutenant/decorated
general ticket would make Bush look even stupider for being a deserter.
I think Kerry/Clark would be unstoppable.

David W

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I was leaning towards Clark (and still may vote for him), but I think Kerry may be more electable.
I like Kerry because he (unlike pansy Bush) is a decorated Vietnam Veteran, with years of experience
in the Senate. I think Bunnypants Bush has been the worst President in our nations history. He is by far
the dumbest President ever.  I do not see how any sane person could support Bush.

Our allies now see what an imbecile Bush really is. Our enemies revel in Bush's incompetence.
We need a regime change before the Bush Gestapo can do any further damage to this country
and to the world. I respect both Kerry AND Clark. I just want someone who will thoroughly
trash Bunnypants Bush in the debates (I don't care what Peter Jennings thinks about that either)
and in the election.  Republicans are far more dangerous than Al Qaeda or the Taliban (just a lot greedier).

Al Granger

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I'm writing to say that I love Howard Dean.
He's passionate, articulate, experienced and he's got balls.

He fights the fair fight and he doesnt back down.
Besides, he's a doctor and you can take him home to mom.

There are a lot of people out there who would walk through fire for
Howard Dean and I love to see that kind of enthusiasm for a candidate.
The man has charisma with a capital "C" and I have been behind him since the
beginning and I will support him till the bitter end. Thats my two cents.

Victoria in Hawaii

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

Dear BartCop:

I was nearly sickened by the appearance of GOP Joe LIEberman on Whore
Blitzer's Late Edition on Sunday, but I am glad I didn't smash the screen as I felt
like doing because I got to witness Terry  McAuliffe handing Ed Gillespie his
ass on a platter.  The public could not care less that Michael Moore called the
Chimp in Chief a deserter, but Bush's attack dogs just won't let go of that
bone.   I urge you to get a transcript of the exchange between McAuliffe and
Gillespie, but I can assure you it's the sort of thing that will make Peter
Jennings wish he'd never brought the subject up.   Essentially, Terry said the
deserter  charge may not be accurate, but that AWOL might be because of the huge
gap in Bush's military service in the Alabama NG.   He reminded folks that
for a year, Bush didn't show up for duty but that he did manage to work on a
congressional campaign.  He also reminded viewers that the reason Bush wasn't in
Vietnam was because his rich influential father fixed it so he could get into
the guard.    I would love to see this exchange on your website.

I am praying and crossing my fingers like crazy for General Clark.
Keep up the good work, and next November, we will see the demise of
the Fourth Reich once and for all.

Joyce in Philadelphia

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

Hey BC!

I thought the whole tone of this was supposed to explain “who you are voting FOR?” without slamming the other candidates.

Today you published a piece from a Kerry supporter who said “The other democrats have about as much integrity
as a pile of Republican dung.  Clark is a Republican posing as a democrat.  Dean is a nut case addicted to ridding
the world of homophobia.  That's nice but it doesn't create jobs and it does nothing for our mangled veterans from Iraq.
Edwards would make a nice puppy for my ex-girl friend.”

This guy doesn’t seem to notice the irony that his concern for our guys in Iraq is somewhat mitigated
by the fact that his candidate voted FOR THE WAR!!!!

Why do so many Democrats enjoy losing?


PS…Regarding the Howard Dean Top Ten, I think Dean himself wrote that.
Which would of course explain why there was no Clinton blow job line.

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...


I heard yesterday, 1/25/04, from both Tom Brokaw and George Will (on a couple of the Sunday morning shows)
that the person the White House is the most "afraid of" is John Edwards.  They are worried because Edwards is very
concerned and talks explicitly about 35 million Americans living in poverty, etc, etc, (and he has a well spelled-out plan
as to how to begin to tackle this problem).  Poverty is something that is NOT in the Smirk Administration's vocabulary,
and it's got them completely wigged out!  That being the case, I will vote for anyone who has this group of thugs shaking in their boots.


Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

Dear Bart,

I wrote some of this before (1/17), but either you didn't get it, or it was too stupid to deal with, but I'm trying again:

I'm voting for Howard Dean.  The Pink Tutu crowd is out, even though they're correctly stealing his good stuff
after seeing that it works.  I don't like Kucinich's opportunistic switch from anti-choice votes, and think he's
otherwise unrealistically liberal.  I don't like Sharpton's race baiting, and don't think much of how seriously
he's taking this.  I think I like Clark, and he would probably make a terrific president, but really hated his late
entry into the race because it looked like a lot of "important" people stroked him into it.  He has a strong
character, but his campaign is really weak.

Now for the positive:  Dean's got a proven record of excellent fiscal stewardship of his state.  He's also proven
able to work as a centrist, and with both parties to get his state ecologically, economically and physically healthy.
One of his planks is about healthcare, and this idea would be to do nationally what he's done for all the children
in Vermont:  An offer of a  home visit from a professional or paraprofessional to every parent of a newborn.
It sounds simple, but it would make all the difference to many families who could either really use the help or
be able to ask questions, or simply be able to appreciate a sense of caring and community from the STATE!
He's said that any competent kindergarten teacher can tell you which of the kids in the class would be likely
to wind up in jail.  Investing in early intervention ideas like that is a much smarter expense than expanding our
failing penal system.  Much healthier for the social fabric of our country, too.

I admire the fact that he campaigns with truth, even if it's what we might not want to hear.  We can't have everything
- like, if we fix NAFTA and get manufacturing jobs back in the country, then we can't complain when the prices at
Wal-Mart go up.  I saw him on c-span actually tell a roomful of Iowa seniors that one of the main problems with
healthcare expenses is that the technology has made people unrealistic about their own life expectancies.  They might
not have liked hearing that, but they listened respectfully and it appeared that they appreciated being spoken to like adults.
There's more, but you only wanted a couple of paragraphs...

One of the things I like best about him, is that his toughest choices as governor were made when his back was
against the wall (Vermont's Act 60 & the Civil Unions bill), and even though they went against the grain of his
character, he made those correct choices for the good of the people in the state, and in the best tradition of
what I think America stands for.  Supporting better education for kids from the poorer districts in the state
with help from the wealthier districts makes everybody do better.  Civil Unions providing gay couples with
equal rights under the law makes everybody do better.  Dean is not a coward, moral or otherwise.
He's smarter than the rest of them, does better when he's sick and exhausted than Bush on his best day,
and he will not back down.

Dave & Jen

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

    I stand behind Howard Dean.  Some observe he is a little angry, perhaps a little gruff.
There is nothing wrong with that given that he has a good heart.  Carl Rove is going to direct
$200 million dollars worth of the the most vial advertising money can buy toward the nominee.
I want someone a little gruff.  Dr. Dean strikes me as honest, thoughtful, plain spoken, and pragmatic.
Any good actor can stay in character while he reads a stump speech.  In America we already have
plenty of good actors,  what we need a good president.

    I like Howard Dean because I am one of the "special interests" financing his campaign -
and thousands of other Americans like me with contributions averaging $75 each.

Tom Meyer

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I like four things about him.
1: he's smart enough to bring Clinton's America back, and smart enough not to get a blowjob from an intern
2: he's run large, diverse organizations before as Supreme Allied Commander Europe
3: he will take the fight to the enemy, just like they taught him to do at the War College


4: he's the only candidate the Republicans dare not attack; Clark has the ammunition to have the Republicans
in Congress send Bush and Cheney back to Texas long before next January. Bush brings up something from
Kosovo, Clark runs some video of Andy Card whispering in Bush's ear that "the second plane has hit the tower"
followed by Bush giving one of his patented Dumb Looks before he goes back to the goat book. Bush tries that
"not a real Democrat" line, Clark responds with revealing the string of lies in SOTU 2003 and SOTU 2004.
Bush tries to use No Child Left Behind as an "achievement," Clark will tell America what's really in that law.
(Did you know that after 2011, for a public school to not be taken over by the federal government exactly
one hundred percent of its student body must pass standardized tests? There's not a school in the world that
can pull this off.) Bush starts bragging about his military achievements, Clark puts his Class A uniform jacket
on the table, then tells Bush to put up or shut up.

Clark will pull a number six on Bush, which is why I've got to support him.

--Jim Mowreader

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

My personal opinion about what you "heard" about Wes' "poor" performance in the debate was more
media smear after he had the balls to stand up to Jennings who tried to make Wes look "bad" for standing
on the same stage as MM after he acused the Righteous One of being a War Deserter. I've seen many
writeups say that took balls, and I agree. Wish I could have seen it.

My answer to Jennings or Paula Zahn would have been like, "I am so old, I remember a day when
so-called journalists wouldn't ask a former general and/or a candidate for president whether there was
any truth to a charge like this.... they would have actually DONE THIER EFFING JOBS and
investigated until they really knew the answer themselves!"


I saw that debate live and Clark was fine.
He was very smart and presidential.

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

    I'm voting for John Kerry after leaving Wes Clark due to his inability to garner enough support
among Democrats and his recent gaffes in the debate.  I like Wesley Clark but I like Kerry as well
and Kerry seems to be doing well in the primaries.  Kerry also has a military record that rivals anyone
else's and puts the Dipshit Deserter's to shame.  I would never vote for Lieberman, who is a Repugnican
is Dems' clothing, Kucinich is good but has no prayer, Edwards would be OK and could possibly beat
The Houston Half-wit but I doubt he'll win any primaries, Sharpton can never win a national election
and Dean has no military resume' and is perceived as too unstable to beat The Crawford Criminal in an election.

I also do not like Dean's position on marijuana as illustrated in a recent Rolling Stone interview.
He is adamantly opposed to legalization - even for medicinal use.  He is a lot more conservative than
most people think.  Anyone with half a brain (excludes most Repugnicans) should oppose Dubyahoo's
oil war so that is not enough for me to support Dean.  We should all get behind one candidate as soon
as possible so we can begin the vast project of educating the Moron Majority in this country who still
think Iraq had something to do with 9/11 and Dubya Da Dolt is a war hero.

All things considered, I will vote for ANYONE who is not a Repugnican.


Dave, Clark's recent gaffes in the dabate?
Did YOU see the "gaffes" or did you read about them in Bush's good puppy press?

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I hope to vote for President Kerry and Vice Prisident Edwards.  However, they should run as a team
with an anounced administration that includes Bill Clinton as Secretary of State, Wesley Clark as
Secretary of Defense, and Howard Deans as Secretary of Health and Human Services (or whatever it is called now).

By showing the voters the vast difference in the whole administration vs Bush's America will overwhelmingly vote for change.


Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I have an opinion about this whole Kerry winning Iowa thing.  I was watching Sylvia Browne on  Montel
and she predicted that Kerry would win the nomination and Bush would win the Presidency.  I was shocked
because I had almost forgotten that Kerry was in the race.  All I had heard about was Dean Dean Dean.

Then it occured to me that the Republicans must has something really really bad on Kerry and they want him to win,
and they will whip it out close to the election when it is too late for us to chose another candidate.  I mean something
really bad like when Eagleton was running for Vice President and it was exposed he saw a psychiatrist for depression.
That wouldn't be considered too bad nowadays but at the time it destroyed his campaign especially with the press
relentlessley hammering into our counsciousness.  Just like they are doing with Dean's emotional outburst which
I thought was a genuine show of emotion and vitality.

So I believe their game plan is for the Republicans to try to get Kerry or Edwards (who is way too young for voters)
to win all the primaries even if they have to switch parties and pretend to be Democrats to vote.  Once they get Dean
and Clark out of the way and Kerry gets the nomination then they will suddently come up with something.

It sounds paranoid but it makes sense, especially since I know they are afraid of Clark and Dean.  My suggestion for
Kerry is that if he has done something which the press can multiply a billion times and keep him from becoming
President then he had better come out with it now while he can do some damage control.  My suggestions to
Democrats is to really vote in huge numbers to counteract these nasty people.

Carla Cannon

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I'm voting for General Wesley Clark.  Compare him to the other Democratic candidates & he comes out on top.
Remember, he was drafted into this race; it's not a step-up in his political career, as it is for all of the other candidates.
His experience is unparallelled:  top of class at West Point, Rhodes Scholar, a WOUNDED VIETNAM VETERAN,
a four-star General, Supreme Commander of NATO who led the successful war in the Balkans, respected world leader,
raised by a widowed bank secretary.

Next, he can beat George Bush.  For the past 10 years I've been living in the South, where white preachers campaign
every Sunday for conservative Republican values.  A decorated war veteran who has voted Republican in the past has
the best chance of winning any cross-over or undecided votes.  Edwards isn't tough enough, and is seen as a new
Jimmy Carter.  Dean is already being slaughtered as pro-gay.  Kerry is an establishment Yankee Liberal.
The other candidates are distractions.

His weakness is his lack of political experience and he'll need a VP who knows how to operate in the Beltway (maybe Kerry).

KD in SC

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

This is ironic, because I have never supported Dean. But after the media lynching I witnessed,
I think "hey, maybe he is the guy." Of course, the only candidate I've sent money to is Kucinich
(But the media said we may not have him, and we meekly agreed.) In Iowa, I got excited about
Edwards because I swear I heard him say that he supported fully funded public elections using the
people's airwaves. Needless to say, either I was hearing things (my husband heard it, too) or his
advisers said, "What, are you crazy? You want the FOX psycho squad gunning for you instead of Dean?"

I want to hear Edwards repeat what he said, and if he did, he'd be my first choice. But for the first time,
Dean's running a very close second in my book. After all, the media Wurlitzer claimed Dean was "angry."
My, my people. Dean in particular, and democrats in general mustn't get angry over a little fraudulent war
or stolen election or some stupid thing like that. I mean, ladies don't scream when they're getting raped.
Let's keep some decorum, people!


Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

VERY intelligent man and a list of accomplishments as long as Bush's criminal record.
How can AWOL possibly win against a Supreme Allied Commander (Europe, 1997-2000)???

Besides, this country can use another Rhodes Scholar.

Donna in Philly

 Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

I was an early supporter of Dean.  I emailed you before he announced his candidacy and you emailed me
back saying "Who is he?  Can he get any traction against Bush?"  I give Dean credit for energizing the Dems
when things were at their lowest point.  He took Junior on squarely with no equivocation and he did ignite
more open opposition to the war among the Dems.  If Dean is nominated, I will happily support him with
my $$ and vote even though I believe Kerry has the best chance to win after Dean damaged himself in Iowa.

The point I want to make for all who send their emails in supporting their guy, when it's all said an done,
FULLY support whoever is chosen.  Leave the primary stuff behind and get behind the chosen nominee
because beating Bush is much more important than paybacks for bad feelings during the primaries.
I'll enthusiastically support Kerry, Dean, Edwards, Clark or, even, Lieberman.

Final comment...I post as "the loyal opposition" on conservative political boards.
Based on the discontent I see there with Junior from conservatives and other pubbies,
the punk is ripe for defeat if we support the Democratic nominee fully.  Thanks.

Steve - Denver

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

Unless something outrageous happens in the meantime, I am voting for John Kerry because, for once, I believe
that we do, now, need a candidate who is experienced in the workings of Congress, crooked though they may be.
There is another reason: Kerry, of all of the Presidents and candidates of my generation, best represents the two
most honorable actions anyone could take during the Vietnam war. First, he served, and he served with honor.
He saw the lies and the dishonor of two administrations in the escalation of that war, came home and led the
Vietnam vets in the fight to stop the war and bring our men and women home.

This is, I believe, the most talanted and smart field of candidates the Democrats have fielded in many a year.
I know Clark said that he is not interested in the second slot, still I would love to see a Kerry/Clark ticket.
Honor vs. Awol; Smart vs. dumb as a box of rocks, True patriotism and courage vs. flagwaving, war-mongering
chickenhawks who don't give a damn about anything but money and their superwealthy friends.

But in November, I will vote for the Democrat no matter who emerges as the candidate; unless it is Lieberman,
in which case, I am moving to New Zealand  (Lieberman was more critical of Clinton for lying about adultery
than he has been about the never-ending spew of Bush lies about something far more serious to most of us.
I think he has a serious screw loose somewhere.) Not only will I vote for the Democrat, but I will do
something I have not done since Bobby Kennedy was killed. Actively work for the election of the
Democrat and the prosecution of Bush and his cadre of evil-doers.


Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

Who are these Dumb democrats who like Kerry?  Kerry IS a Dukakis!

Do we have to give ANOTHER election away with a gore/dukakis/kerry NON-fighter?!!

Before Gov. Dean came along and visibly moved the debate from "morals"
and "values" back to the outright LIES of the bush/gop regime, kerry could NOT
even get respectable press in his home town of Boston!

Wow, the Republicans and their media whores JUST DELIGHT in the fact that
the American public responds to media propaganda.  ALL they have to do is
attack and assassinate one Dem. leader or candidate at a time (dukakis, clinton,
gore, dean), and then they get carte blanche to ram their ENTIRE r-w agenda
through Congress, because there are NO dems left standing with the courage to
stand up and fight back (after the leaders have been destroyed).


Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

Hi Bart,

I still like Howard Dean despite all the bashing.  I feel the media is out to get him -- do we really think
Rupert Murdoch of Fox or the defense contractors at G.E. (who own NBC) want Dean to get in the
way of their gravy train?  No way.  The corporate media has as much at stake to keep Bush in power
as any other big business conglomerate.

Having said that, if Dean goes no further in this election (and I wouldn't count him out yet), I'll always be
grateful for his courage and defiance in taking on this administation far before it became fashionable.
Some people call that anger, I call that leadership.  Who would we rather have -- a man who stands up
for his convictions (which happen to be very good ones or the guys (not to namedrop any senators) who
bought the whole deal hook, line and sinker? Would we rather have Dean who had the courage to say
the capture of Saddam meant nothing, than (once again) certain Senators who immediately took the "safe"
route and bashed Dean for saying that?  Well, once again, who's right and who's left with egg on their faces?

Keep up the good work...


Four reasons I'm voting for Clark:

1. He is absolutely not a politician. He is not pointing fingers at his fellow Dem candidates.
2. He is not an in-your-face person. Look in his eyes, and you see a real deep concern for what you are saying to him.
3) He has the ability to administer.. I am married to one of those (not for the gov) and I know something about the
    importance of recruiting, hiring and occasionally firing the right people in order to get the job done. Wes can do that!
4. He joined the Democratic Party, he was not born into it. He made a rational, adult decision in a desperate time.
    He wants to be our leader, he doesn't think it's owed to him. I love that.

 Bonnie H

Bonnie, nice picture.
It looks like you two are singing a duet :)

Subject: Who I'm voting for and why...

Dear Bartcop,

Who I'm voting for may come as no surprise.  It is the why that I wish to explain.
So, stay with me, and maybe you'll learn something from the female perspective.
This is very simple, reasonable, and by golly, it just might work.

For a moment, let's put all politics aside and focus on the big picture.
What is the main goal of the democratic party this election?
Of course, we all know the answer to that question.
We want to oust the Republican Ass Monkey that has been flinging shit
in the White House for way too long.  So, I believe that the way to get
back our democracy is as simple as an Edwards/Dean ticket.

Here's why:

(1) Edwards is marketable.
He's handsome, he's charming, he blushes on television for Hell's sake.

(2) The majority of the voting population (bartcop readers aside) is drawn to shiny things.
My supporting argument of this being: soap operas, reality shows, and flight suits.

(3) Women vote.
Sadly enough, women are just realizing their political strength, and not all of us
are politically savvy enough to vote based on the issues that don't concern us.
Hell, "no child left behind" is just the sound-bite a single-mom of 3 needs to hear
to seal her decision, and that even rings a bell with struggling families that are
concerned with their children's welfare, which most of us are.
Fact: Edwards is a family man, and not by words alone.

With that said, I'll explain why Dean as V.P. instead of Edwards.
Simply, I agree with his political views, but he's not marketable.
Edwards, however becomes more so with Dean on his ticket.
Beauty and Brawn.

Laura Smith

 back to

Privacy Policy
. .