Should Kerry give up his Senate Seat?

[Parkbandit]

Do you think Kerry should give up his Senate seat while he is running for the White House?

From the Daily News:

BOSTON -- A top Massachusetts Republican yesterday called on Democrat John Kerry to resign from the Senate while he seeks the presidency, a vacancy that would allow the GOP to fill the seat.

Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey argued that Kerry, the state's four-term senator, has missed too many roll call votes and has done a poor job of representing his constituents. Of the 112 Senate votes this year, Kerry has voted just 14 times, according to an Associated Press tally.

"It's not fair, it's not right and the public is not being well-served," said Healey, who said she was speaking on behalf of Republican Gov. Mitt Romney. "I'm calling on John Kerry to resign so that we can fill that office with someone who is 100 percent devoted to the job of representing the people of Massachusetts."



Campaign spokesman Michael Meehan said Kerry has no plans to resign his Senate seat.

Asked about the GOP calls, Kerry dismissed the suggestions, telling reporters as his plane landed in Kentucky, "I'm running for president because we have to put this country back into a place of responsible leadership. And I believe that I'm serving the citizens of Massachusetts and the country in the proposals that I've laid out."

State Democratic Chairman Phil Johnston accused Healey and Romney of being "attack dogs for the Bush-Cheney campaign." He noted that President Bush did not give up the Texas governorship while running for president in 2000, although he spent most his time out of state that year.

Under Massachusetts law, if a vacancy occurs Romney would appoint an interim senator, who would serve until statewide elections, which occur this fall. There would then be a special election to fill the remainder of Kerry's term, which ends in 2008. And in 2008 there would be an election for a full six-year term.

In 1996, Republican Bob Dole gave up his seat as Kansas senator in early June before formally receiving the GOP nod to run against President Clinton. When Dole quit the Senate, the state's Republican governor, Bill Graves, appointed Republican Lt. Gov. Sheila Frahm to fill the remainder of the term until a special election, also won by the GOP.

Four years later, Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut ran for re-election to his Senate seat while simultaneously running as the Democratic vice presidential candidate. That decision worried some state Democrats because if Lieberman had resigned, a Democrat could have run. But if he stayed and became vice president, Republican Gov. John Rowland would have appointed a GOP replacement.

Lieberman's safety net worked for him. He lost the White House race, but kept his Senate seat.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

yes

[Warriorbird]

You wouldn't comment if it was a Republican.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
You wouldn't comment if it was a Republican.

You are so sure about this? THAT is your rationale for saying he shouldn't give it up.. because he's a Democrat?

Dole gave up his.

Bush had a Lt. Governor.

How is he fulfilling his responsibilities as Senator to the Massachusetts people? Is there a Lt. Senator or someone that can vote in his place during his absence?

[DeV]

Yes, he should give up his seat. Will he? No.

[Latrinsorm]

14/112 probably makes sure (it should, anyway) he's not going to get reelected.

[Ilvane]

I say no. We have a Republican governor who is itching to appoint a Republican to the seat. Mitt Romney is the biggest opportunist there is. He lived in Utah forever, and owned a house in MA and came and run here.

There are ulterior motives to the call..and I as a citizen of Massachusettes don't mind that he's running for President, and is busy doing that.

-A

[Ilvane]

We are in Mass. The chance of a Republican winning a senate seat here is pretty slim.

-A

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Ilvane
There are ulterior motives to the call..and I as a citizen of Massachusettes don't mind that he's running for President, and is busy doing that.It's one thing to try to do two jobs, it's another to really suck at both. Someone needs to prioritize, and it's not Nader.

p.s. Republicans never have ulterior motives. They're the Good Guys, remember? :smilegrin:

[Galleazzo]

I'm a citizen of Massachusetts too, and I say that Bushie bumbuddies who live elsewhere don't have a say and should shut the fuck up. Bush didn't resign as Governor of Texas, I remember.

Besides which, PB, what the fuck do you care? Aren't you glad that a Massachusetts senator's missed some roll call votes?

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Ilvane
I say no. We have a Republican governor who is itching to appoint a Republican to the seat. Mitt Romney is the biggest opportunist there is. He lived in Utah forever, and owned a house in MA and came and run here.

There are ulterior motives to the call..and I as a citizen of Massachusettes don't mind that he's running for President, and is busy doing that.

-A

EVERYTHING about politics is an ulterior motive. I think if it's a Democrat.. then it should be replaced with another Democrat.. but that's me.

I just find it funny that you support a Senator that simply does not have the time to support the state that elected him. I'm not surprised.. just amused.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Galleazzo
I'm a citizen of Massachusetts too, and I say that Bushie bumbuddies who live elsewhere don't have a say and should shut the fuck up. Bush didn't resign as Governor of Texas, I remember.

Besides which, PB, what the fuck do you care? Aren't you glad that a Massachusetts senator's missed some roll call votes?

For the reading impaired: Bush had what we call a Lt. Governor.. who is essentially working in place of the Governor. He didn't miss any votes or not get the job done.. because someone else was handling it for him. In Kerry's case.. those 98 opportunities to vote went unanswered. Kerry was elected by the voters of Mass. to be their voice in the Senate.. a job which he is doing as poorly as he is getting his presidential message out.

And I wouldn't call 98 out of 114 "some" role call votes.

[Ravenstorm]

If a replacement was mandated to be of the same party as the person stepping down, then maybe. But for a Republican governor to be able to appoint a Republican senator to replace a Democratic one (or the converse) is just not right. It violates the choice of the voters.

Raven

[DeV]

I agree with Raven, I was thinking that as well. It's partly ludicrous for something like that to happen in the first place. The Republicans would be hard pressed on caring as much if the replacement would definitely be a Democrat.

[Kefka]

Without a change in current law, a Republican appointed by Romney would hold the seat until the 2006 election.

Unless they pass this bill
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/06/11/special_election_bill_gets_new_life/

[Wezas]

Ooops (http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,63878,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2)

[Pallon]

pwned!!!!!11

[Chadj]

The senate is useless.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
If a replacement was mandated to be of the same party as the person stepping down, then maybe. But for a Republican governor to be able to appoint a Republican senator to replace a Democratic one (or the converse) is just not right. It violates the choice of the voters.

Raven

I actually agree up to a point. I really think Kerry's vacant seat should be filled with a Democrat. But I don't believe it to violate the choice of the voters any more than electing a Senator and not have him represent the voters for the past year.

[Zeyrin]

I think the people in the state Kerry is in the senate should decide if they want him booted or not. Either way, it doesn't affect my little world; therefore, I do not give a damn.:moon:

[Warriorbird]

I think all politicians should give up their seats when running. Doesn't stop me saying that it wouldn't have been brought up by you about a Republican, Parkbandit.

[Edited on 6-21-2004 by Warriorbird]

[Zeyrin]

Until we take a stand and force changes in the political system, one politician will kiss you while the other will give you a reach around. Either way, brace yourself and hope they brought KY Jelly. :scared:

[DianaBanana]

Originally posted by Zeyrin
Until we take a stand and force changes in the political system, one politician will kiss you while the other will give you a reach around. Either way, brace yourself and hope they brought KY Jelly. :scared:

The warming sensation kind? jk :shibby:

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Wezas
Ooops (http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,63878,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2)

OH NOEZ, ALL OF THE REPUBLICANS WONT VOTE FOR HIM NOW

That dumbshit should just make the 100g's.. he's not changing anyones vote by having a domain that no one goes to.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
I think all politicians should give up their seats when running. Doesn't stop me saying that it wouldn't have been brought up by you about a Republican, Parkbandit.

[Edited on 6-21-2004 by Warriorbird]

And if a democrat made this thread with opposite circumstances, you wouldn't have said 'you wouldn't say this if it was a democrat.'

You're the same as Parkbandit.

... Now we cue the 'I'm not really democratic, I'm actually conservative in some areas' response from Warriorbird.

[Edited on 6-22-2004 by Hulkein]

[MaryJane]

I think IF people give up their seats to run for president, etc that the citizens of that state should have the absolute right to VOTE who takes over the seat.

If Romney gets to choose, I'd rather have Kerry sit there and only go as he said 'when he thinks his vote will make a difference'. If they change the laws, then I'd agree with the stepdown.

[Back]

You forgot the I don't give a shit vote. Really, some republicans come off as nit-picky, judgemental little bitches. Someone tries to voice a real legitimate concern to them and they get all "MOMMY THEY WANT TO HURT ME!!" then dance and cry and point their fat fingers at something else to blame.

Quit the party mentality. Its waaaaaaay old and we need unity now.

[Artha]

Really, some republicans come off as nit-picky, judgemental little bitches

This is true for people on both sides of the aisle.

[Back]

Originally posted by Artha

Really, some republicans come off as nit-picky, judgemental little bitches

This is true for people on both sides of the aisle.

Fair enough. But to me, most democrats don't bitch nearly as loud enough as they should.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
I think all politicians should give up their seats when running. Doesn't stop me saying that it wouldn't have been brought up by you about a Republican, Parkbandit.

[Edited on 6-21-2004 by Warriorbird]

Good thing we didn't have to worry about it.

Bush had a Lt. Governor to step in.

Dole did leave his Senate position.

Maybe we will have to see if you really have a point in 4 years when a Republican will run for the Presidency again.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Hulkein

Originally posted by Warriorbird
I think all politicians should give up their seats when running. Doesn't stop me saying that it wouldn't have been brought up by you about a Republican, Parkbandit.

[Edited on 6-21-2004 by Warriorbird]

And if a democrat made this thread with opposite circumstances, you wouldn't have said 'you wouldn't say this if it was a democrat.'

You're the same as Parkbandit.

... Now we cue the 'I'm not really democratic, I'm actually conservative in some areas' response from Warriorbird.

[Edited on 6-22-2004 by Hulkein]

While I respect Warriorbird and his opinion... he is NOT the same as Parkbandit.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Backlash
You forgot the I don't give a shit vote. Really, some republicans come off as nit-picky, judgemental little bitches. Someone tries to voice a real legitimate concern to them and they get all "MOMMY THEY WANT TO HURT ME!!" then dance and cry and point their fat fingers at something else to blame.

Quit the party mentality. Its waaaaaaay old and we need unity now.

I was going to post something about that being the weakest argument here.. but then I saw Backlash wrote it.. so it's normal. That IS the best he could do.

[Kefka]

When Dole quit the Senate, the state's Republican governor, Bill Graves, appointed Republican Lt. Gov. Sheila Frahm to fill the remainder of the term until a special election, also won by the GOP.

Not exactly the same thing.

[Delirium]

I think all politicians should give up their seats when running.

I agree with this as it also proves they are willing to sacrifice for their decision to run. I also think it would only be fair if the person leaving is a democrat that a democrat steps in to hold the job til an election can be held. Bush should have probably given up his governship as well but that just doesnt seem as important as a senator. The really funny part of Kerry not doing his job is one of the votes he missed was on extending unemployment,something he cares about, and it lost by ONE vote haha. That alone should tell him something. I bet if Kerry had a talk with Romney and they compromised Kerry could step down and a moderate democrat could step in and they both win. The republicans get rid of Kerry and the democrats dont lose the seat.

[Kefka]

Unfortunately, that won't happen. The reason they're making a stink about it is because they want a Republican in that seat. That's why they're fighting the bill for a special election. They'd never give up a seat in the Senate.

If Kerry gives up his seat now, he risks losing the vote of his own state. Would you vote for someone who abandoned you and gave his seat to someone of the other party? Not to mention it would be more ammunition for the Republican party.

[Hulkein]

Park, you're correct.. he isn't doing the same thing you did.

He is however doing the same thing he is accusing you of.

[Nakiro]

Kerry should be less concerned that Bush isn't doing his job and more concerned that his own job isn't getting done.

[longshot]

Didn't Bob Dole resign during his campaign?

He took shit politically for giving up where he was needed...

It can be spun either way, I guess.

He has to look out for the party. If he resigns, doesn't the governor appoint the senator?

If it's a republican governor, then there's no way he'll resign.

[Galleazzo]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
For the reading impaired: Bush had what we call a Lt. Governor.. who is essentially working in place of the Governor. He didn't miss any votes or not get the job done.. because someone else was handling it for him. In Kerry's case.. those 98 opportunities to vote went unanswered. Kerry was elected by the voters of Mass. to be their voice in the Senate.. a job which he is doing as poorly as he is getting his presidential message out.And for the shitheads who are thinking impaired, Texans didn't vote for some Lt Gov to do the job, they voted for Bush to do the job. That's $115 thou a year Bush screwed Texans out of ... did he pay them back? No, bet not.

In any event this is just more fucking dirt the Bushies are kicking up to try to cover up the body bags coming home from Vietiraq. And it's Massachusetts' business, so unless I see MA in your location lines ...

:stfu:

[Warriorbird]

The day I vote for Kerry is the day he ceases sucking. Call it what you want.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
The day I vote for Kerry is the day he ceases sucking. Call it what you want.

Looks like Nadar for you then.

:lol:

Actually... Nadar makes a better candidate in my opinion. At least you KNOW where he stands.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Galleazzo

Originally posted by Parkbandit
For the reading impaired: Bush had what we call a Lt. Governor.. who is essentially working in place of the Governor. He didn't miss any votes or not get the job done.. because someone else was handling it for him. In Kerry's case.. those 98 opportunities to vote went unanswered. Kerry was elected by the voters of Mass. to be their voice in the Senate.. a job which he is doing as poorly as he is getting his presidential message out.And for the shitheads who are thinking impaired, Texans didn't vote for some Lt Gov to do the job, they voted for Bush to do the job. That's $115 thou a year Bush screwed Texans out of ... did he pay them back? No, bet not.

In any event this is just more fucking dirt the Bushies are kicking up to try to cover up the body bags coming home from Vietiraq. And it's Massachusetts' business, so unless I see MA in your location lines ...

:stfu:

I'll remember the strength of your argument here the next time you open your ignorant face in anything outside MA.

Dumbass.

[Warriorbird]

:mutters: It's a bad day when the Republican party candidates have their strings pulled by the religious right/are corrupt as the day is long and force you towards the Democrats and the Democrats don't really have a position on anything other than "Rrr. Republicans bad." and are just outright too damn weak and don't really forward anything superior to what the Republicans are offering and don't take a stand on social issues and force you towards socialism....

I miss Ross Perot.

[Edited on 6-22-2004 by Warriorbird]

[Kefka]

Well, Nader is gonna receive a visit from the Congressional Black Caucaus today. They're gonna try to convince him to drop out of the presidential race. Hopefully, they'll invite Suge Knight as well.

[Galleazzo]

Vote for whomever you want, but PB's bullshit just shows what Republicans have been all about for years. They're scared shitless of debating on the issues, so they just love smokescreens.

what are you afraid of, PB? Why not tell us why you think Bush is doing a good job or why Kerry wouldn't? That too hard for you to manage?

:stupid:

[Delirium]

And it's Massachusetts' business, so unless I see MA in your location lines ...

A US citizen having an opinion on a US senator seems alright to me even if they dont live in MA. If anything your argument supports the Bush not resigning from being the gov in texas and people commenting from outside texas.

[Galleazzo]

Have an opinion all you want, but if the opinion's about something that's none of your business then STFU.

Whether you want Kerry as your president, that's your business.

Whether we here in Mass want to keep him as a senator, that sure as fuck isn't.

:down:

[Back]

Originally posted by Delirium

And it's Massachusetts' business, so unless I see MA in your location lines ...

A US citizen having an opinion on a US senator seems alright to me even if they dont live in MA. If anything your argument supports the Bush not resigning from being the gov in texas and people commenting from outside texas.

Sure, if its the Senator you vote for. We do vote them to those offices. Seems to me like the people who vote that Senator into office have just a little more say about what who they elect does.

[Delirium]

He isnt in your state senate though. He is in the US senate and therefore can be held accountable. No one here has any power to get rid of him so opinion is all we have. I lived in MA for like 3 years does then my opinion mean more? Nope it dont and neither does yours.

He must not have much faith he can win the presedential election if he isnt willing to give it up til after he wins. I can understand that and actually agree with him there. I think the best solution would be what i said earlier that both sides compromise and each get what they want. Even if its unlikely thats still something ill hope for.

[Galleazzo]

Word. Sorta why Bush not resigning as Gov of Texas didn't bother me. Not my state, not my bizness, if Texans were down with that that was their deal, if they weren't mebbe they would've done something about it. No one asked me.

Now I went for Bush in 2000 but I wouldn't vote for the lying fuck again if Bush's campaign promised me a blowjob from Kate Winslet on the presidential yacht.

[Delirium]

Now I went for Bush in 2000 but I wouldn't vote for the lying fuck again if Bush's campaign promised me a blowjob from Kate Winslet on the presidential yacht.

Just out of curiousity do you think most politicians are honest and Bush is an exception(assuming he is a liar)? Do you think Kerry or Nader or whoever you vote for will be honest?

[Galleazzo]

Good question. Dunno. But this is the way I look at it.

What Clinton lied about that the Republicans fucking IMPEACHED him over was cheating on his wife.

What Bush lied about was whether Saddam had WMD, and because of that bullshit he conned Congress into signing off on a war that's blown up billions upon billions of dollars and over 1000 American lives. Meanwhile the country that's PROUD of their WMDs is North Korea, and Bush doesn't do shit about them.

You tell me what is worse.

[Delirium]

Ill probably sound like im Bill O'Reilly or something but heres my response :)

1) Clinton wasnt impeached because he lied about Monica, they did so cause he lied while under oath. I admit that was a stupid thing to do though so you win.

2) I think Bush and almost every person in congress thought Saddam had WMD,in fact i have a Hillary quote in my sig saying so. I had a lot of democrats to choose from as most thought Saddam did have WMD. In fact Tenet the intelligence guy said WMDs in Iraq was a "slam dunk". I dont know about you but if someone who should know what hes talking about sounded that confident id assume they were right too. I dont get why people say he lied. Id also assume the UK had their own faulty intel going on and that is the reason they went with us.

I assume most politicians lie or at least tell partial truths as they want to be seen in the best possible light. Id also admit Bush has lied several times,i just dont think he did so,at least on purpose about the wmds in iraq. Now one could argue he used the WMDs in Iraq as a good excuse to invade them when he had other reasons. I also think though that the reason im glad we invaded Iraq instead of N Korea is because N Korea already HAS their nuke power so dealing with them is more delicate. Its much easier beating them before they reach their goals then once they already have.

[Artha]

I think Bush and almost every person in congress thought Saddam had WMD,in fact i have a Hillary quote in my sig saying so.

Shit, not just them. Everybody thought Saddam had WMDs. I don't feel like it now because it's late, but there's quotes going around from French, German, Belgian, lots of heads of state saying he had WMDs.

[Kefka]

I was waiting for them to bring this article up.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/22/kerry.senate.vote/index.html

I've never heard of anything like this before. Sounds like the 5th grade to me.

[Artha]

Looks like Kerry got pwned.

[Delirium]

Heh thats funny it really is like the 5th grade. Dont fool yourself though these games go back and forth. This one in particular though is weak.

[Galleazzo]

Hilary Clinton didn't have the whole US government telling her Saddam had WMD. She heard it from Bush's men.

Now I don't know about you but when I say something as the owner of my company, I take responsibility for it. If I screwed up it's still my responsibility. If my employees screw up it's still my responsibility. And if anyone dies because any of my employees screw up, it's still my responsibility.

Now either Bush is a liar or he got a bunch of incompetants working for him. So where are the mass firings? Nada. The CIA guy quit only now.

Either way I don't want him running the country. Maybe he's just incompetant but his incompetance cost a fuckload of American lives, and so far the bill for this war is about $350 for every American. That's $350 out of YOUR pockets, each and every one of you except for Chica and X and the other Canadians, to kick a tin pot dictator that was no threat to us out of Iraq.

you think that was worth it?

:flames:

[Delirium]

I can understand why you dont think its worth it but i do. Getting rid of him before he decided to fly under the radar for a few years and something really horrible could have happened(admittedly probably not to the US). If i could turn back time and fist the N Koreans so we wouldnt have to worry about them with Nukes id do that too.

[Galleazzo]

Yeah, it's kinda the rub, ain't it? We pwn Saddam because we think he got nukes. Well, he doesn't, but North Korea ADMITS to it, and they even kinda brag about it. So what's Bush waiting for?

[Delirium]

Its only polite to wage war on two countries per term in office :) Any more than that and you're a warmongerer and the such. Any less and you're a peacenik hippy unicorn heart.

[Kefka]

I knew there weren't any WMD's. But how else would he have his war? Then again, I knew he'd find away to fight his dad's war in Iraq before he was given the White House.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Galleazzo
Vote for whomever you want, but PB's bullshit just shows what Republicans have been all about for years. They're scared shitless of debating on the issues, so they just love smokescreens.

what are you afraid of, PB? Why not tell us why you think Bush is doing a good job or why Kerry wouldn't? That too hard for you to manage?

:stupid:

Actually.. do a search for Parkbandit and I am sure you will answer yourself and people won't accuse me of sounding like a broken record.

Dumbass.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Kefka
I knew there weren't any WMD's. But how else would he have his war? Then again, I knew he'd find away to fight his dad's war in Iraq before he was given the White House.

Wow Kefka.. we need you in the CIA.. because obviously you have access to better information than everyone else in the ENTIRE WORLD.

You are now the proud holder of the Dumbshit award for that quote... "I KNEW THERE WEREN'T ANY WMD"

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Galleazzo
Hilary Clinton didn't have the whole US government telling her Saddam had WMD. She heard it from Bush's men.

Now I don't know about you but when I say something as the owner of my company, I take responsibility for it. If I screwed up it's still my responsibility. If my employees screw up it's still my responsibility. And if anyone dies because any of my employees screw up, it's still my responsibility.

Now either Bush is a liar or he got a bunch of incompetants working for him. So where are the mass firings? Nada. The CIA guy quit only now.

Either way I don't want him running the country. Maybe he's just incompetant but his incompetance cost a fuckload of American lives, and so far the bill for this war is about $350 for every American. That's $350 out of YOUR pockets, each and every one of you except for Chica and X and the other Canadians, to kick a tin pot dictator that was no threat to us out of Iraq.

you think that was worth it?

:flames:

LOL... you really have no clue. If I didn't already award Kefka the dumbshit award.. you may have gotten to hold it for a while.

During Clinton's term, he repeatedly said that Saddam had WMDs. REPEATEDLY. Saddam used WMDs on his own people.. so the FACT that he DID have WMDs is simply that.. a fact. To argue anything of the contrary is simply ignorant.

Argue that Saddam finally smartened up and destroyed all his WMD prior to our invasion if you like.. that is still up for debate. Hell.. argue that Space aliens came down and took the WMDs off his hands..

But please don't claim that Bush was stupid for thinking that Iraq had WMDs prior to the war.. because you are saying everyone but Kefka is stupid.

[Kefka]

Come on, PB. Surely you're smarter than that. Are you saying you were truly surprised when they couldn't find any WMD's? I don't need to work in the CIA to have common sense..... Um... you're talking about the same CIA that passed false information about terrorism dropping to 1969 levels?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/01/25/sprj.nirq.kay/index.html

Perhaps you should save that award for yourself since you can't really back up your words with facts. Only insult people who can actually think for themselves. Did you know Iran has a fully capable nuclear program?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/12/iran.iaea/index.html

Perhaps the loss of American lives are worth it only if we 'think' they have WMD's.

[Edited on 6-23-2004 by Kefka]

[Back]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Actually.. do a search for Parkbandit and I am sure you will answer yourself and people won't accuse me of sounding like a broken record.

Dumbass.

With these kinds of rebuttals, you are starting to sound like a broken record even though you've thrown in the especially mature touch of adding lame ass pics when you avoid something and call someone stupid.

The issue of this topic is poor political game playing by republicans. Yeah, they may have pwnd Kerry by postponing the vote, but what about the Vets? Its a really sad display by the republicans to play political games with Vets healthcare benefits.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Originally posted by GalleazzoEither way I don't want him running the country. Maybe he's just incompetant but his incompetance cost a fuckload of American lives, and so far the bill for this war is about $350 for every American. That's $350 out of YOUR pockets, each and every one of you except for Chica and X and the other Canadians, to kick a tin pot dictator that was no threat to us out of Iraq.

you think that was worth it?

:flames:

Having seen the mass open graves from the brutality of Saddam and his sons, yes.

[DeV]

Originally posted by Kefka
I knew there weren't any WMD's. But how else would he have his war? Then again, I knew he'd find away to fight his dad's war in Iraq before he was given the White House. Kefka was not alone in his thinking. I'd venture to say his opinion on whether or not Saddam actually had WMD's was more along the lines of the administration not having any proof. At least, the people who adamently felt this very same way described that as a reason. Being caught up in the aftermath of 9/11 of course we wanted to believe what our government was telling us. My guess may have been un-educated at the time....however we have still found nothing.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Backlash

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Actually.. do a search for Parkbandit and I am sure you will answer yourself and people won't accuse me of sounding like a broken record.

Dumbass.

With these kinds of rebuttals, you are starting to sound like a broken record even though you've thrown in the especially mature touch of adding lame ass pics when you avoid something and call someone stupid.

The issue of this topic is poor political game playing by republicans. Yeah, they may have pwnd Kerry by postponing the vote, but what about the Vets? Its a really sad display by the republicans to play political games with Vets healthcare benefits.

Actually.. reread the topic title again. It's a simple poll to ask if Kerry should give up his senate seat. I know what the topic was about because guess what.. I STARTED IT.

I've stated numerous times why I think Bush is a good president and why Kerry will not be a good president. Do some reading and stop requesting that I spoon feed you like a child.

Thanks.

[CrystalTears]

So why is it that past Senators and so forth who have been going for the Presidential Race have been able to either juggle both tasks without neglecting their main objectives, or at least have resigned in order to focus on one aspect, and yet Kerry can't handle it? He can't even make a decision as simple as quitting in order to work at his best capacity?

Seems to me if he can't handle both, or can't even make important decisions, he's not the President for me. I don't like him on general principle, and that may be quite naive of me, but he's not strong enough to be this country's leader. I don't plan on voting for him.

[Edited on 6/23/2004 by CrystalTears]

[DeV]

Neither do I CT.

[Skirmisher]

Yawn

Politics inspired move.

Wow, surprising for that to happen in an election year.
:down:

[Kefka]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
So why is it that past Senators and so forth who have been going for the Presidential Race have been able to either juggle both tasks without neglecting their main objectives, or at least have resigned in order to focus on one aspect, and yet Kerry can't handle it? He can't even make a decision as simple as quitting in order to work at his best capacity?

Seems to me if he can't handle both, or can't even make important decisions, he's not the President for me. I don't like him on general principle, and that may be quite naive of me, but he's not strong enough to be this country's leader. I don't plan on voting for him.

[Edited on 6/23/2004 by CrystalTears]

The answer to this is they couldn't juggle both tasks. This is the first time it's been brought up because they want to make it an issue. You can't campaign across the US and be present for every meeting in DC. None of them have, but all of a sudden it's a huge problem when Kerry does it?

The governor of Mass. is eager to fill that seat with a republican. Kerry is, in fact, looking out for the people by ignoring this political move.

Bush is a horrible president. Between terror alerts and wars and scandals, we've been living in a state of fear. The economy sucks. 1.3 million job growth is not enough with 3 million lost jobs. Hmm.. exactly how are we doing on the war on terror?

Kerry may not have a firm stand on some issues, but at least the things he seems firm about has more to do with our economy, bringing us more jobs and returning things back to pre-Bush levels.

[Hulkein]

Kefka.. it wouldn't be an issue if Kerry went to some votes once in a while... It doesn't even look like he's attempting to.

As CT said, he should be able to juggle it or lose his job, just like in any line of work.

[Artha]

So why is it that past Senators and so forth who have been going for the Presidential Race have been able to either juggle both tasks without neglecting their main objectives, or at least have resigned in order to focus on one aspect, and yet Kerry can't handle it?

Because Kerry sux0rz.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Hulkein
It doesn't even look like he's attempting to.

Like the one he just showed up to that the Republicans rescheduled? Or the ones where the Republicans came out and admitted that even if he had showed up, they'd just have voted differently to counter his vote?

I think he knows a lot better than all the armchair generals which votes actually require his vote and which are already set in stone. The entire Senate knows on 99% of the bills which will get passed before they even get close to being voted on.

If he wins the Presidency, most likely the people he represents will be quite happy and not mind at all if he missed most of the votes due to it. If he loses and they object to the time it cost him, they won't vote for him in the next election. But in neither case, should a repalcement from the opposing party be able to be appointed.

So no, he definitely shouldn't step down under the way the current system is set up.

Raven

[Kefka]

Originally posted by Hulkein
Kefka.. it wouldn't be an issue if Kerry went to some votes once in a while... It doesn't even look like he's attempting to.

As CT said, he should be able to juggle it or lose his job, just like in any line of work.

Guess you missed the link. I'll post it again.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/22/kerry.senate.vote/index.html

According to the article, even close votes would've turned into lost votes. I miss the days when people got into government to represent their people instead of paving the way for party lines or sticking it to the other guy.

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by Kefka
The answer to this is they couldn't juggle both tasks. This is the first time it's been brought up because they want to make it an issue. You can't campaign across the US and be present for every meeting in DC. None of them have, but all of a sudden it's a huge problem when Kerry does it?

If all Senators were behaving the same way with every Presidential race, I'm sure we would have heard about it. The fact that people are making a stink about his inactivity says something about his priorities and work principles.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by KefkaI miss the days when people got into government to represent their people instead of paving the way for party lines or sticking it to the other guy.

How again is he representing his people?

By not voting he is representing them?

:lol:

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm

So no, he definitely shouldn't step down under the way the current system is set up.

Raven

I actually agree. I don't believe it is fair that a Republican takes his seat if he was to give up his seat.

[Kefka]

Originally posted by CrystalTears

Originally posted by Kefka
The answer to this is they couldn't juggle both tasks. This is the first time it's been brought up because they want to make it an issue. You can't campaign across the US and be present for every meeting in DC. None of them have, but all of a sudden it's a huge problem when Kerry does it?

If all Senators were behaving the same way with every Presidential race, I'm sure we would have heard about it. The fact that people are making a stink about his inactivity says something about his priorities and work principles.

Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey
Bush's campaign co-chairwoman in Massachusetts

I think she wants to be a senator.

[Kefka]

Originally posted by Parkbandit

Originally posted by KefkaI miss the days when people got into government to represent their people instead of paving the way for party lines or sticking it to the other guy.

How again is he representing his people?

By not voting he is representing them?

:lol:

By representing his seat as a democrat and not letting a republican do so. I'd rather have a no vote than a vote for the other side.