[Vision2020] child forced back/was Romney drops out!?
pkraut at moscow.com
pkraut at moscow.com
Sat Feb 9 15:51:47 PST 2008
Those 'circumstances' sent this child to live in a communist country!!
The mother died to give him freedom and they had no respect for that and
neither does anyone else on this site because I am the first one to
mention it and it was about her for me. And his hope for the future.
> Inasmuch as I continue to support Hillary Clinton for President for
> reasons that may not appeal to anyone's political logic but mine, and
> because I was so vehement over the Gerry Weitz attempt to refashion the
> world in his image, I have tried to tone it down a bit and be much more
> my lovable non-contentious self; however, I find I must agree with Sunil
> on this one. Had it been any other child in any other circumstance the
> right wing zealots who champion "the father as head of the family" world
> view would have been right there with the police to be sure he was
> returned to his rightful owner.
>
> I also believe a more visable role for Bill Clinton in Gore's
> campaign just might have been enough to keep the Rs from stealing that
> election. I think Gore was hurt, not helped, by his refusal to involve
> Clinton.
>
> One question, too: Doesn't the Idaho sunshine law cover city council
> actions? If so, how could they legally vote in a closed session to sign
> a contract with Hawkins?
>
> Sue H.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sunil Ramalingam
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 9:47 AM
> Subject: [Vision2020] child forced back/was Romney drops out!?
>
>
> I know I'm sidetracking...
>
> I agree that returning a child to his father may have caused political
> problems for Gore had he accepted help from Bill Clinton in 2000. But I
> do disagree that 'they forced that Cuban child back to Castro.'
>
> They returned a child to his father after his mother's death. A child
> should be with his or her natural parents unless there's a showing that
> the parents are unfit. There was no such showing in the Gonzalez case.
> Instead we had politics sticking its ugly head into family business,
> just as we later saw in the Terry Schiavo case.
>
> Extended family, wherever they're located, don't get to grab someone
> else's child unless the parent/s are unfit. We wouldn't allow the
> Beverly Hills relatives to grab a Moscow/Potlatch/Deary child from a
> parent just because the relatives had a big house with a cement pond.
>
> Sunil
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-> ---
> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 19:04:17 -0800
> From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> To: sdredge at yahoo.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Romney drops out!?
>
>
> Scott,
>
> In 2000 Bill Clinton had a 42% approval rating. Campaigning with
> Clinton in 2000 would have been a kiss of death. He had an even lower
> rating in Florida because they forced that Cuban child back to Castro.
>
> Yes, Gore lost the election because Florida's Secretary of State,
> Kathleen Harris, certified the wrong set of popular votes giving the
> electoral votes to Bush instead of Gore. Also, Nader split the
> Democratic vote in Vermont, giving the state to Bush. Gore didn't lose
> the election in 2000, it was stolen from him, and Nader made it
> possible. Nader doesn't have issues he is concerned with, he is only
> concerned about himself. The environment has been demolished and set
> back decades because Bush was allowed into office.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Donovan
>
> Scott Dredge <sdredge at yahoo.com> wrote:
> It's a stretch to suggest that Nader sabotaged the 2000 election.
> The reason Al Gore lost was because of Al Gore himself. Under the
> categories of coulda, woulda, shoulda, Gore coulda had Bill Clinton
> campaigning for him instead of distancing himself from Clinton. And
> Bill Clinton knows how to run a successful campaign.
>
> I'd like to see a Clinton/Obama ticket running against a
> McCain/anybody ticket. Also, it doesn't particularly matter much to me
> which ticket wins, I'm just looking forward to the regime change even
> though George W. Bush is basically neutered at this stage.
>
> -Scott
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com>
> To: Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net>
> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Sent: Friday, February 8, 2008 1:36:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Romney drops out!?
>
>
> On 2/8/08, Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Edwards would be good, as I like what he says, but my
> preference would be Ralph Nader, who may very well
> campaign for President. Appealing to Progressives is
> good with me, despite whatever baggage Nader may have
> (and really, who doesn't have baggage?)
>
> Nader has a record of working on changing America for
> the better for 40 years. He is well connected to the
> activist community, and engaging activists is key to
> changing our country from it's disastrous course. An
> Obama/Nader ticket sounds sweet to me.
>
> gclev
>
> Many progressives begged Nader to drop out of the 2000
> presidential race, due to the potential of splitting the Democratic vote
> harming Gore's chances. We all know the result. Nader helped put Bush
> in the White House in 2000. Nader's Florida votes alone gave Florida's
> electoral votes to Bush, as the vote count actually was counted, though
> we also know that absent illegal voter disenfranchisement, deliberately
> pushed by Florida's Secretary of State and Bush supporter Katherine
> Harris, Gore would have won Florida, even with Nader's participation.
>
> Republican operatives were running ads supporting Nader's 2000
> candidacy, knowing this would hurt Gore. And Nader knew this.
>
> Nader even argued that a Bush presidency might be good for the
> nation in the long run, given that Bush would create such a back lash
> against his policies that progressives in the long run would become more
> unified and motivated.
>
> But as far as I am concerned, given the damage of the Bush
> administration, Nader's 2000 presidential run was an irresponsible
> application of idealistic principles over sensible practical politics,
> resulting in wounds that may not heal for decades. The pending US
> Supreme Court nominations in 2000 alone were enough of a reason for
> Nader to withdraw to allow Gore the best chance of a win. Nader and
> everyone knew there was zero chance of Nader taking the White House.
> His presidential run did not even result in a stronger party base
> supporting Nader or those who support his policies. His supporters are
> more off the radar now than in 2000.
>
> I recall hearing from Nader supporters in 2000 how Gore and Bush
> both represented corporate big money, and entrenched elitist Washington
> power, and were not that different. Well, we have seen that however
> much this was true, there were substantial differences between Gore and
> Bush that would have taken the USA in very different directions on
> critical issues, the invasion of Iraq and climate change, for example.
> I do not believe Gore would have supported the invasion and occupation
> of Iraq, and he would have began to address climate change while the
> Bush administration was in denial, backing big oil and energy interests,
> who did not want to address climate change for obvious financial
> reasons.
>
> Nader would be a terrible choice for a VP candidate under Obama.
> I lost respect for him as a politician after his sabotage of the 2000
> presidential election. This showed he is not willing to compromise when
> the overall good of the nation is at stake.
>
> Ted Moffett
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
>
> =========================> =========================> =====
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>
> =========================> =========================> =====
>
>
>
> =========================> =========================> =====
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>
> =========================> =========================> =====
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-> ---
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-> -----
>
>
>
> =========================> =========================> =====
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>
> =========================> =========================> =====
=====
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
http://www.fsr.com/
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list