########################################################################## # If Goanet stops reaching you, contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # Want to check the archives? http://www.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet/ # # Please keep your discussion/tone polite, to reflect respect to others # ##########################################################################
--- Bosco D'Mello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >It's more about don't vote for Dubya - the greater of >the two evils. > Wrong! There is nothing evil about Kerry, or for that matter, about Bush. This is not an election of the lesser of two evils. Self-important cynical remarks like these, made in the above post, are insulting to the genuine sentiments of the voters in this election, especially when made by people who are marginally aware of, or uninterested in, the important issues at stake. > >Kerry remains the un-Presidential looking President->wannabe !! > Nonsense! The debates showed Kerry to be much more presidential than Bush. Indeed, Bush looked like a bumbling clown in his presence. > >On most serious issues, there has been little or no >evidence that Kerry would reverse policies that Dubya >has formulated and implemented......it's all about >being at the right (wrong) place at the right (wrong) >time !! > Wrong again! Kerry would reverse almost every Bush policy. For example, he would repeal the irresponsible tax cut for the wealthy. He would re-introduce and re-enforce responsible environmental regulations. He would extend health care to the uninsured. He would not privatize social security. He would renegotiate the global climate change treaty. He would reverse the ban on embryonic stem cell research. He would enforce fairness in international trade agreements. He would ensure that the anti-terrorism laws do not compromise individual liberties, civil rights and basic human rights. He would re-impose the assault weapons ban. He would invite international cooperation and commitment in securing and rebuilding Iraq. He would not fight unnecessary wars. He would promote diplomacy in solving international problems. He would stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons to multilateral and bilateral agreements. He would promote research into alternative sources of energy. He would not be beholden to corporate interests. He would reduce the ballooning deficit, pay down the national debt and impose fiscal discipline once again. He would support public education and make college education more accessible to everybody. He would adopt smarter, more efficient and more effective anti-terrorism measures, e.g. by holding countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan more accountable. He would not infuse ideology and religion into the affairs of the public. He would not support the amendment of the constitution for trivial ideological reasons. He would not appoint ideologically driven supreme court justices. Cheers, Santosh