What will you do if Bush wins?

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-20-2004
What will you do if Bush wins?
841
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 12:02pm
I would like to know what you all will do if Bush wins? I don't know if I can handle another 4 years. Any ideas of how to reclaim our country and restore democracy and freedom? I'm worried that another 4 years will increase the authoritariansm and absolute power that Bush has come to claim and further trample on our constitution and individual liberties. I'm truly frightened.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-16-2004
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 12:15pm
Um, just out of curiosity, how exactly did you arrive at the conclusion that Bush has "absolute" power, and what specific individual liberties have you lost since Bush took office? Maybe if you listened less to propoganda you wouldn't be so frightened.

If Bush is reelected, I will breath a giant sigh of relief because the country will have avoided a major disaster for our nation.

Just a little perspective from the other side.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-20-2004
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 12:31pm
I don't even know where to begin. Do you even read the papers? You should try reading European or Canadian papers as most of the media in this country is owned by corporations that want Bush to win because they will be able to steal more money from the American people.

I'll leave you with just three - of the MANY - reasons Bush is dangerous.

- The FBI’s use of the Joint Terrorism Task Force to monitor, interrogate and suppress anti-war and other political protesters. This interrogation of peaceful protesters brings back echoes of the days of J. Edgar Hoover. Resources and funds established to fight terrorism should not be misused to target innocent Americans who have done nothing more than engage in lawful protest and dissent.

- Limiting individuals freedoms by controlling their PRIVATE donations (http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/04/r_editorial_Romero.htm)

- Ignoring the health of the American people:

Tuberculosis had sneaked up again, reappearing with alarming frequency across the United States. The government began writing rules to protect 5 million people whose jobs put them in special danger. Hospitals and homeless shelters, prisons and drug treatment centers -- all would be required to test their employees for TB, hand out breathing masks and quarantine those with the disease. These steps, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration predicted, could prevent 25,000 infections a year and 135 deaths.

By the time President Bush moved into the White House, the tuberculosis rules, first envisioned in 1993, were nearly complete. But the new administration did nothing on the issue for the next three years.

Then, on the last day of 2003, in an action so obscure it was not mentioned in any major newspaper in the country, the administration canceled the rules. Voluntary measures, federal officials said, were effective enough to make regulation unnecessary.

The demise of the decade-old plan of defense against tuberculosis reflects the way OSHA has altered its regulatory mission to embrace a more business-friendly posture. In the past 3 1/2 years, OSHA, the branch of the Labor Department in charge of workers' well-being, has eliminated nearly five times as many pending standards as it has completed. It has not started any major new health or safety rules, setting Bush apart from the previous three presidents, including Ronald Reagan.




Avatar for javaaddict
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 1:22pm
This board is pretty biased as in these people are very pro bush you might want to try this board .. http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/listsf.asp?webtag=iv-wcnewsandpol&nav=start
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-20-2004
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 1:30pm
I really don't understand why so many of the American people continuely vote against their own interests. It is the one thing that has always puzzled me. Why would a poor or middle class person keep putting people in power who hord all the resources and make life more difficult for them? Why wouldn't someone want health care, child care, better education and as a result a better society? Bush has created a LARGER more inefficient government and made it easier for the rich to keep on stealing from the majority. Are people really that easily dupped in the guise of a "safer country" when we all know the country is less safe than it was four years ago?
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2003
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 1:35pm
Move out of the country! ;-)

"Without music, life is a journey through the desert"...

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2003
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 1:45pm
Nisa,

Bush made the largest improvement to Medicare since the Great Society Programs of the Johnson/JFK era.

Heatlthcare skyrockets in the US in part due to trial lawyers who make large profits from the pain and suffering of others often via junk science. Mr. Edwards on Kerry's ticket is part of the problem. Republicans wish tort reform, Democrats are opposed.

Bush managed the largest reorganization in the federal goverment since the end of WW II. The entire homeland security system has greatly improved our situation, there have been no new sucessful attacks since 9/11 (we can only hope our luck holds out).

The Patriot act in addition to helping to nail terrorists and those who provide them refuge is also helping solve many other crimes.

The MATRIX project is helping NY State to remove half a million illegals who are using invalid or stolen social security numbers off the rolls of those with legal drivers licenses. Numberous cabbies for example had multiple licenses to help avoid NYC laws to assure passenger safety.

The airlines are safer and have never been so safe.

Bush's NCLB represents a major increase in funding for education, and attempts to re-orient a failed system for the betterment of minority children.

More people now own homes than ever before in our history, home ownership is a gatway to the middle class... and generally provides great security for families.

Installation of a passive Iraq, which is democratic and peaceful as well as a base for american deployment helps assure greater peace throughout the middle east.

Afghanastan will over time improve it's own situation with our help, between Iraq and Afghanastan Iran becomes flanked and is less likely to cause problems.

Lybia has renounced terrorism. Israel is seeking to remove itself from the occupied terrortories. Egypt is passive, Saudi, UAE, and other gulf nations are passive.

GNP is up.

The various above things under leadership of Bush... when voting for Bush I am voting my interests!

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-04-2003
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 1:54pm
"I would like to know what you all will do if Bush wins?" Breathe a huge sigh of relief and PARTY!

I will be terrified, truly unable to sleep, if Kerry wins. But I don't think we have to worry about that ;)

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-20-2004
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 1:59pm
And one more thing... If you really think we're safer, why is more money spent of suppressing individual freedoms than patrolling our borders? Why are we inciting fundamentalism abroad as opposed to learning what we are doing wrong? Why did we send less troups to Afghanistan, a country that actually HAS terrorists, than to Iraq, a SECULAR country that actually held religious fundamentalism at bay. Saddam was a lunatic for sure, but we as Americans are no more safer now than when he was in power. As you know, America was the ones who actually trained and armed Saddam to begin with. If we had spent more money and time in Afghanistan than just abandoning it, maybe those in the middle east would actually think we were sincere about bringing democracy there. But it is now obvious that we want to control Iraq's resources.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2003
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 2:03pm
This article was posted on In the News board. I think it raises similar questions like you own and you will find it interesting..

I have been interested in why people vote against their own economic interest for some time. I saw a documentary about how Alabama where a legislature wanted to raise real estate taxes on LARGE land owners. It is noteworthy that 25% of Alabama’s residents are illiterate and get their news from TV. The large land owners got together and fought back, by portraying the bill as a plan to increase ALL real estate taxes. The land owners continue to pay little real estate taxes, while the populace suffers through cuts in schools, police, and other services.

I have also read threads that address the questioned why do people vote against their own economic interest. Why are they content to see the Republicans time and again pass legislation that benefits the corporations at the expense of the people. The answer is of course they place abortion, gay marriage and school prayer ahead of their economic interests. Therefore, Ken Lay and other corporate execs can walk away with billions and a short term in prison. It’s OK that their children and grandchildren will be paying back a national debt. It’s OK that the medicare bull gives money to the corporations at the public expense with little benefit to seniors.

I saw a article in the Washington Post –the beginning is quoted below:

Rhetoric On Values Turns Personal

Attacks Sharpen In Presidential Race

By Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen

Washington Post Staff Writers

Saturday, July 10, 2004; Page A01

BEAVER, W.Va., July 9 -- The growing debate over the presidential candidates' values turned personal Friday, as Sen. John F. Kerry blasted President Bush for laziness and lax pursuit of Enron Corp.'s Kenneth L. Lay, while the Bush campaign accused the new Democratic ticket of condoning a "star-studded hate-fest."

Kerry, who is trying to make values a centerpiece of his campaign, unexpectedly found himself on the defensive after he praised performers who called the president a "thug" and a killer during a Democratic fundraiser Thursday night at Radio City Music Hall in New York.

Friday's debate demonstrated not only how personal the attacks have become, but also the aggressiveness of both campaigns as they move toward their national conventions. With polls showing the two sides still running essentially even nationally, advisers to Bush and Kerry have made clear they are unwilling to cede any issue or any ground with so much at stake in such a competitive election. It also shows how values and cultural issues will play a prominent role in each party's strategy for victory, especially in the South and in rural communities.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38595-2004Jul9.html

My first thought: Kerry is playing into Bush’s hand;Bush must be delighted, Kerry is diverting the issue to culture not the war or economics. What a way to loose, or is it?

There is a book out entitled “What is the matter with Kansas?" By Thomas Frank, It's "the same thing that's been the matter with America for so many years: the culture wars." In his book WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH KANSAS Frank, a native Kansan and onetime Republican, seeks to answer some broader American riddles: Why do so many of us vote against our economic interests? Where's the outrage at corporate manipulators? And whatever happened to middle-American progressivism? The questions are urgent as well as provocative. Frank answers them by examining pop conservatism -- the bestsellers, the radio talk shows, the vicious political combat -- and showing how our long culture wars have left us with an electorate far more concerned with their leaders' "values" and down-home qualities than with their stands on hard questions of policy.

A brilliant analysis -- and funny to boot -- What's the Matter with Kansas? presents a critical assessment of who we are, while telling a remarkable story of how a group of frat boys, lawyers, and CEOs came to convince a nation that they spoke on behalf of the People.

http://www.henryholt.com/holt/whatsthematter.htm

http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/culturewars.html

Knowing the game should make the election more interesting.





iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2003
Fri, 08-20-2004 - 2:05pm
As far as your first question.. I will be dissapointed if he wins but I am strong enough to survive another four years and so will you. Lets hope for the best.

Pages