NO to Kucinich because of his flip-flop on abortion

NO to Sharpton because of Tawana Brawley
NO to Edwards because he's a trial lawyer
NO to Graham because he authored the PATRIOT act
NO to Moseley-Braun because of her shady past
NO to Lieberman because of his stand on Iraq
NO to Clark because of his involvement in Waco
NO to Kerry because of his involvement in Skull & Bones
NO to Gephardt because he's lost too many times before

I'm I the only one who thinks an inviolable litmus test is a silly thing when our common goal should be BushCo's ouster?

NO to Dean because of his NAFTA support.

How's that?

I was poking fun at this thread, in which the poster says 'NO to Dean because of his stand on Cuba.'

so to single out one shows your bias.

Edit. I shouldnt speak for you, so i withdraw that comment, but there are other "No..." threads out there.

I was also inspired by the 'no-to-Kerry-because-of-his-S&B-membership' threads I've seen in the past. I just think so-called 'third-rail' issues are silly. I'm adamantly opposed to the death penalty, yet I would have no problem voting for Dean. It's true, I like HD, but I also like Wesley Clark, John Kerry and John Edwards. For that matter, I'd vote for Gephardt, too--even (gulp) Lieberman, if it came down to it. (I don't think any of the others have a chance in Hell of making it 'till November.)

he's a Rockefeller Republican, as they say.

Any one of these people would make a far better president than the buffoon in there now.

I can overlook quite a lot, considering what's at stake.

No get out before I vomit you immoral moster! :D

Did you enjoy my turn in Jurassic Pork?

or if Jeebus ever returns he could run as a liberal assuming we forget that whole money laundring-destruction of property affair.

is the day we die.

We have to allow for people, even politicians, to change. If we expect them to be static entities then we are voting for corpses.

I say in the primaries support whoever you think is the best representitive of your positions. Then after the primary put the fights aside and vote for whoever can stop Bush Co. The major voting trend this election is going to be Stop Bush. For this reason we need the person representing our side to reflect whatever positions we hold. They will naturally gain the Stop Bush votes. If we nominate a Bush Lite candidate in the hopes that it will syphon the center votes off we will lose any effect we might gain from the Stop Bush momentum.

both at the same time

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0002554755.01._PE30_PIdp-schmoo2,TopRight,7,-26_SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0890878048/ref=pd_bxgy_img_2/104-7314585-3359111?v=glance&s=books

That is as long as it's with real Log Cabin syrup, and not the lite stuff

Me too. As long as we don't beat around the Bush, but rather beat the Bush himself!

You're saying that you want a candidate whos thinking never evolves? How goofy is that?

Only STUPID people don't change their minds...

I will vote for whomever the Democrats nominate.

Period.

"you don't have to be in love to dance"

For myself, I've been volunteering for Howard Dean's campaign, BUT, I will also look at the other candidates; and if Dean does not get the nomination in the end, I will support the Dems candidate. What I will not tolerate is people walking out in a huff and staying home and not voting or voting third party because their guy/gal didn't get the nomination.

And those who would use these litmus tests have an insidious political disease named by the late activist lawyer Flo Kennedy as the "Nothing-But-The-Best-For-The-Oppressed Syndrome".

IOW, these folks claim to want nothing but the best in their candidate, BUT, all too often, the best is simply not available, and therefore the "oppressed" STILL end up with NOTHING.

Doris "Granny D" Haddock puts this in perspective, and I repeat this to all who would impose impossibly high standards or "gotcha" litmus tests:

"...There are many among us on the peace trail who will not support a candidate unless that candidate is perfect on every issue. Politics is about winning. For us, it is about winning to save lives and raise people up from poverty and illness and loneliness and injustice. Those posturing on the left sometimes forget that. Don't tell me that you can't support a particular candidate because of this or that. This isn't about you and your precious political standards. It is about saving nature and our people. We are coming out to win, so please don't stand in our way. When we have reasonable people in power, let us start our arguments again, for we can not move forward unless we have a decent government underneath us and a Bill of Rights to let us speak freely..."

Link:
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15789

:kick:

he's responsible for every evil act committed in human history.

(for reference, there's a really funny thread on this issue...accusations include Clark lost Pearl Harbor, was the 2nd gunman, and composed "Copacabana" as performed by Barry Mannilow)