Previous entry: « Workin' for the Man |
Next entry: 'It's all about the berries with you...' » |
'T'es pour Bush, toi? Non, c'est un gros connard, lui!'
November is setting itself up to be quite a month of negativity as I find myself voting against things instead of for anything. I hate having to do that. I wish I liked Kerry at all.
srah - Monday, 12 July 2004 - 10:16 AM
Tags: election 2004, marriage, politics, voting
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.srah.net/mt421/mt-pings.cgi/3361
Comments (9)
Jez - July 14, 2004 - 7:10 AM - ℓ
Kerry seems rather anonymous - but he does have one thing going for him - he's not Bush.
Although these November elections won't be as negative as the second round of the last French presidentials - everyone was shuddering with distate because they had to vote for Chirac.
jday - July 14, 2004 - 10:00 AM - ℓ
I have reigstered to vote, but voting for either Bush or Kerry just makes me feel dirty. I understand the argument that voting for an independant is essentially giving a republican your vote (as you are taking votes away from the democrat nominee), though. Oh, the dilemma!
jday - July 14, 2004 - 1:20 PM - ℓ
That means that I *must* vote for Kerry, because Bush is evil! When you get back to the States, you have to see Farenheit 911. Some parts are not 100% accurate, but it is still a wonderful documentary of the evilness that is Bush.
MaTT - July 17, 2004 - 11:28 PM - ℓ
I know this isn't a political blog, but for the sake of balancing the above comment, if you want to see more extremist anti-Bush views, then go see the movie jday raves so much about. As mentioned on this site, some people just want to be told what to believe, and even worse, through propaganda seemingly portrayed as 'factual'. i hope your readers and everyone else are more intelligent than to simply believe and regurgitate what they see on screen.
srah - July 18, 2004 - 6:16 PM - ℓ
Hmmmmm... using the word 'evil' does seem a bit like sinking to his level, but at the same time, we're told what to believe anyway. Any information that we get about any situation has been released to us by those who want us to know, then filtered through the media. They have all put their own spin, pro- or anti- situation, on it and presented it to us in that light.
What in life is "factual", really?
MaTT - July 18, 2004 - 7:51 PM - ℓ
I agree that everyone puts their own spin on a given subject, because human nature is inherently opinionated and interpretive. So, in that case, yes, we are 'told' what the seeming 'facts' are (the philosophy behind the word 'fact' excluded), and we need to trust where the information comes from in order to know much of anything.
However, we do have the complete freedom to choose *who* we trust, how much we believe them, and how many different other sources we consult to verify these people's statements. I don't 'trust' conservatives any more than i do liberals, but i do trust moderate people more than extremists on both sides, because they don't blind themselves and others from seeing the opposite viewpoint.
I think the likes of Britney "shotgun wedding" Spears, Jennifer Lopez, Elizabeth Taylor et al have done much more damage to the sanctity of marriage than any gay wedding could ever do.