[Vision2020] child forced back/was Romney drops out!?
deb
debismith at moscow.com
Sat Feb 9 16:19:03 PST 2008
Still seeing a Communist under every bed, Pat? Sad.....
Debi R-S
----- Original Message -----
From: <pkraut at moscow.com>
To: <vision2020 at mail-gw.fsr.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] child forced back/was Romney drops out!?
> 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/
>
>
> =======================================================
> 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
> =======================================================
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list