A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Original post by marymoon
Friday, November 5th, 2004 17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists...by Michael Moore
Dear Friends,
Ok, it sucks. Really sucks. But before you go and cash it all in, let's, in the words of Monty Python, “always look on the bright side of life!” There IS some good news from Tuesday's election.
Here are 17 reasons not to slit your wrists:
1. It is against the law for George W. Bush to run for president again.
2. Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president since Woodrow Wilson in 1916.
3. The only age group in which the majority voted for Kerry was young adults (Kerry: 54%, Bush: 44%), proving once again that your parents are always wrong and you should never listen to them.
4. In spite of Bush's win, the majority of Americans still think the country is headed in the wrong direction (56%), think the war wasn't worth fighting (51%), and don’t approve of the job George W. Bush is doing (52%). (Note to foreigners: Don't try to figure this one out. It's an American thing, like Pop Tarts.)
5. The Republicans will not have a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the Senate. If the Democrats do their job, Bush won't be able to pack the Supreme Court with right-wing ideologues. Did I say 'if the Democrats do their job?' Um, maybe better to scratch this one.
6. Michigan voted for Kerry! So did the entire Northeast, the birthplace of our democracy. So did 6 of the 8 Great Lakes States. And the whole West Coast! Plus Hawaii. Ok, that's a start. We've got most of the fresh water, all of Broadway, and Mt. St. Helens. We can dehydrate them or bury them in lava. And no more show tunes!
7. Once again we are reminded that the buckeye is a nut, and not just any old nut -- a poisonous nut. A great nation was felled by a poisonous nut. May Ohio State pay dearly this Saturday when it faces Michigan.
8. 88% of Bush's support came from white voters. In 50 years, America will no longer have a white majority. Hey, 50 years isn't such a long time! If you're ten years old and reading this, your golden years will be truly golden and you will be well cared for in your old age.
9. Gays, thanks to the ballot measures passed on Tuesday, cannot get married in 11 new states. Thank God. Just think of all those wedding gifts we won't have to buy now.
10. Five more African Americans were elected as members of Congress, including the return of Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. It's always good to have more blacks in there fighting for us and doing the job our candidates can't.
11. The CEO of Coors was defeated for Senate in Colorado. Drink up!
12. Admit it: We like the Bush twins and we don't want them to go away.
13. At the state legislative level, Democrats picked up a net of at least 3 chambers in Tuesday's elections. Of the 98 partisan-controlled state legislative chambers (house/assembly and senate), Democrats went into the 2004 elections in control of 44 chambers, Republicans controlled 53 chambers, and 1 chamber was tied. After Tuesday, Democrats now control 47 chambers, Republicans control 49 chambers, 1 chamber is tied and 1 chamber (Montana House) is still undecided.
14. Bush is now a lame duck president. He will have no greater moment than the one he's having this week. It's all downhill for him from here on out -- and, more significantly, he's just not going to want to do all the hard work that will be expected of him. It'll be like everyone's last month in 12th grade -- you've already made it, so it's party time! Perhaps he'll treat the next four years like a permanent Friday, spending even more time at the ranch or in Kennebunkport. And why shouldn't he? He's already proved his point, avenged his father and kicked our ***.
15. Should Bush decide to show up to work and take this country down a very dark road, it is also just as likely that either of the following two scenarios will happen: a) Now that he doesn't ever need to pander to the Christian conservatives again to get elected, someone may whisper in his ear that he should spend these last four years building 'a legacy' so that history will render a kinder verdict on him and thus he will not push for too aggressive a right-wing agenda; or b) He will become so cocky and arrogant -- and thus, reckless -- that he will commit a blunder of such major proportions that even his own party will have to remove him from office.
16. There are nearly 300 million Americans -- 200 million of them of voting age. We only lost by three and a half million! That's not a landslide -- it means we're almost there. Imagine losing by 20 million. If you had 58 yards to go before you reached the goal line and then you barreled down 55 of those yards, would you stop on the three yard line, pick up the ball and go home crying -- especially when you get to start the next down on the three yard line? Of course not! Buck up! Have hope! More sports analogies are coming!!!
17. Finally and most importantly, over 55 million Americans voted for the candidate dubbed 'The #1 Liberal in the Senate.' That's more than the total number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore. Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal. The country has always been filled with evangelicals -- that is not news. What IS news is that so many people have shifted toward a Massachusetts liberal. In fact, that's BIG news. Which means, don't expect the mainstream media, the ones who brought you the Iraq War, to ever report the real truth about November 2, 2004. In fact, it's better that they don't. We'll need the element of surprise in 2008.
Feeling better? I hope so. As my friend Mort wrote me yesterday, 'My Romanian grandfather used to say to me, 'Remember, Morton, this is such a wonderful country -- it doesn't even need a president!''
But it needs us. Rest up, I'll write you again tomorrow.
Yours,
Michael Moore
marymoon
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Also, our last several presidents ahve been very much moderates. Bush I, Clinton...both very moderate, very middle of the road, reaching across the aisel kind of guys.. Bush is not like that. He's hard hitting a conservative agenda. Even repiblican commentators agree that his 'compassionate conservative' promise has not been fulfilled. And the same cna be said of John Kerry, he has long been described as the most liberal senator...
sarahthegreat
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
a very wise man (my dad ) said that the reason people voted for Bush was because they wanted him to finish the war he started. the Kerry campain stated that the country wanted a change and that we should have a fresh start. yet more people voted for bush.
marymoon
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
I think this campaign was won and lost on moral issues and the groundgame. Republicnas played it close to the vest, but they courted the 4 million evangelical christians who didn't vote in 2000, and a lot of them came out and voted on Nov 2.
it isn't always about ideals winning over other ideals, most of the time it's about how well you played the game, and the republicans played it very, very well.
verdila
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Posted by marymoon
Also, our last several presidents ahve been very much moderates. Bush I, Clinton...both very moderate, very middle of the road, reaching across the aisel kind of guys.. Bush is not like that. He's hard hitting a conservative agenda. Even repiblican commentators agree that his 'compassionate conservative' promise has not been fulfilled. And the same cna be said of John Kerry, he has long been described as the most liberal senator...
I agree. This election was very different because of 9-11, the war on terror, and the fact that Bush and Kerry come from very opposing political sides. Yes, Clinton was a moderate Southern dem but he did pack the courts with liberal judges too. Guess we will see what happens in 4 yrs.
verdila
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Posted by marymoon
I think this campaign was won and lost on moral issues and the groundgame. Republicnas played it close to the vest, but they courted the 4 million evangelical christians who didn't vote in 2000, and a lot of them came out and voted on Nov 2.
it isn't always about ideals winning over other ideals, most of the time it's about how well you played the game, and the republicans played it very, very well.
I think Bush also resonates with people because of his personality - he is viewed as a good ole boy and a real person where a lot of ppl in the northeast may think he seems stupid - (contrary to popular belief he scored 1200 on his SATs) - he is not always concerned with names or details leaving that to his staff, he is more of a big picture man. People in the midwest and south see him as one of their own - he is in love with his wife and that shows through too.
Whereas I think Kerry's wife's comments about Laura Bush never having worked may have hurt him and the fact that he left his first wife when she was suffering from mental depression and then tried to get the marriage annulled. Also, putting John Edwards on the ticket was a bad choice.
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth also hurt Kerry tremendously....
And, I think alot of ppl think Kerry is an international elitist -- Two words: global test, and for once, Kerry was being consistent and honest with the public. That may be why he lost.
lesleyw
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Posted by verdila
And, I think alot of ppl think Kerry is an international elitist -- Two words: global test, and for once, Kerry was being consistent and honest with the public. That may be why he lost.
Did you watch the debate? If you did, you know that Kerry was saying that the President was accountable to the people of America for any war that he started. He was not talking about giving our right to protect ourselves away to other countires, although that is what Bush said over and over again; Bush was lying and he knew it, yeah that's a moral man.
marymoon
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Our standing in the world DOES matter. If we get in deepr in this war, or we end up at war with north lorea nd other nations, and we don't ahve western europe backing us up, we're in BIG trouble...so an international test isn'ta wussy way out like george bush paints it, it's the only smart way to do things. Also, this doens't always apply, but if most of the free world believes that what you're doing is wrong, maybe it's time to reevaluate
verdila
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Posted by lesleyw
Posted by verdila
And, I think alot of ppl think Kerry is an international elitist -- Two words: global test, and for once, Kerry was being consistent and honest with the public. That may be why he lost.
Did you watch the debate? If you did, you know that Kerry was saying that the President was accountable to the people of America for any war that he started. He was not talking about giving our right to protect ourselves away to other countires, although that is what Bush said over and over again; Bush was lying and he knew it, yeah that's a moral man.
You know what, I actually watched all of them. So don't patronize me. Oh yeh sure, no Kerry never lies either. And he is a moral man? One who says he threw away his medals to protest the war but then displayed some of them in his office when it is convenient.
We all know politicians from both sides lie to some degree...
lesleyw
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Posted by verdila
You know what, I actually watched all of them. So don't patronize me. Oh yeh sure, no Kerry never lies either. And he is a moral man? One who says he threw away his medals to protest the war but then displayed some of them in his office when it is convenient.
We all know politicians from both sides lie to some degree...
I didn't mean to be rude, but I heard Bush pushing this line on his weekend radio address and that infuriated me. I'm not saying Kerry is perfect, but Bush has blatantly lied about this over and over, and the fact that he used his weekly radio address to push these lies just sends me through the roof. All I was saying is if you did watch the debate you would understand what Kerry had said and that Bush's characterization of it was a lie.
verdila
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Understand but disagree - in the first debate Kerry alluded to a global test that America must pass before we commit our troops to war. So, Bush's people used that in an ad and then Kerry's people shot back saying Bush lost the debate and he was a liar too.
Kerry said presidents have the right to preemption. But he also believes that this right should be subject to regulations by the 'international community,' the UN, etc.
Bush cares about the opinions of our allies, the UN etc too. But herein lies the difference -- he cares about them much, much less than John Kerry does. In effect, the threshold for where and when Kerry will buck the opinions of foreign leaders - including all those mysterious ones who secretly want him to be president - is much, much higher than Bush.
Thus, Kerry would probably not give the world community an absolute veto over American national security, but he would almost surely give them a partial veto.
lesleyw
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Posted by verdila
Kerry said presidents have the right to preemption. But he also believes that this right should be subject to regulations by the 'international community,' the UN, etc.
This is not what he said. Here is what Kerry said. This came from a story on CNN:
'No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded -- and nor would I -- the right to preempt in any way necessary, to protect the United States of America,' the Democrat told moderator Jim Lehrer during the debate.
'But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do it in a way that passes the, the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people, understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.'
verdila
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
He called it a global test - to me that means international first of all. He said he you need approval from your countrymen - well ok, I understand that, but at the time he did get support from his countrymen and the ok from the Senate and thirdly he said that you need to prove to the world your reasons. Isn't that alluding to a global test right there?
Anyway, didn't Kerry vote for the war in the first place also? He also said that Hussein was a grave threat too.
More transcripts -
BUSH: Let me -- I'm not exactly sure what you mean, 'passes the global test,' you take preemptive action if you pass a global test.
My attitude is you take preemptive action in order to protect the American people, that you act in order to make this country secure.
My opponent talks about me not signing certain treaties. Let me tell you one thing I didn't sign, and I think it shows the difference of our opinion -- the difference of opinions. And that is, I wouldn't join the International Criminal Court. It's a body based in The Hague where unaccountable judges and prosecutors can pull our troops or diplomats up for trial.
And I wouldn't join it. And I understand that in certain capitals around the world that that wasn't a popular move. But it's the right move not to join a foreign court that could -- where our people could be prosecuted.
My opponent is for joining the International Criminal Court. I just think trying to be popular, kind of, in the global sense, if it's not in our best interest makes no sense. I'm interested in working with our nations and do a lot of it. But I'm not going to make decisions that I think are wrong for America.
marymoon
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
I'm not so sure Bush had the support of his countrymen
Jordan
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Saying that Bush got more votes than Clinton, Reagan or any other President is moot. It all has to do with population.
After all, Kerry got more votes than Reagan did.
Moehick
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Bottom line MM's comments were meant to add a little humor and fun back into some of America Geez, I guess republicans don't have much of a sense of humor
lanikai
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Posted by lesleyw
Posted by smm2675
without going into my tyrade against MM - I just have this to add - the election is over, Bush won, John Kerry has accepted the lost and now everyone else should to. especially mm.
Yes, Kerry did loose, but it was a narrow loss. Many people put their heart and souls into supporting Kerry and it's important to put the loss in perspecitve -- it was by no means a blow out.
Speak on! That is certainly the truth!
lanikai
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Posted by DjPiLL
I guess FarenHYPE wasn't as influential as MM would have liked.
Given how close the election was (if you believe the results) I would say Farenheit actually was extremely influential.
lanikai
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Whether or not folks realize this Bush or Kerry would not really be doing different things in Iraq because they are both dealing with the fact that for now, we are stuck there. I think Kerry was however was less apt to antagonize and garner further hatred and disapproval of us the way Bush has. I hate to sound repetitive, but fighting terrorism thousands of miles away will do little to stop the people that are currently in this country plotting against us. We have already set in motion a chain of events that will play themselves out regardless of who is in office, but, I do think Bush's policies and military campaign exacerbates the situation.
marymoon
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Right, The Iraq situation is what it is, and it has to be dealt with. Even if you think it's wrong we can;t just not finish what we started and leave millions of people in squalor. I just believe that John Kerry would be less apt to attack unprovoked and wouldn't make so many enemies by taking on the world vigilante fashion
cluelessbride
Posted:
Member since
Re: A little hope for those disappointed by the outcome fo the election
Thanks for posting this. It did make me feel a little more hopeful (a very little) and the laughs helped a lot. He's right, we (anyone who is not a Bush supporter) cannot give up hope!