Plea from a European Friend


PDA






Nick_90
November 1, 2004, 07:01 AM
Dear American Friends,

I have no particular tie with the US except that, as a Swiss citizen, I think both our countries share the values of armed freedom, democracy and determination to remain free against all ods.

I know most Europeans, disinformed by the media, are hoping for a Kerry victory. I myself are not.

I think you should reelect President Bush if only because he is the only candidate ready to stand up a against tyranny and evil. I do not agree with all his policies but I think that this time, the war on terror should supersede all other considerations... This time it is not "about the economy, stupid" but about freedom and peace.

I would hate to see the ennemies of Amercia rejoicing tomorrow: so get out to vote and give Mr Bush another four years...

Thank you and good luck!

Nicholas

If you enjoyed reading about "Plea from a European Friend" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Leatherneck
November 1, 2004, 08:40 AM
Nick:
WILCO.
Out

TC
TFL Survivor

Nick_90
November 1, 2004, 08:52 AM
I beg your pardon, I haven't understood your post...

The Real Hawkeye
November 1, 2004, 08:55 AM
Nick, that's somewhat overly simplistic. There are other candidates who are much stronger on preserving liberty than Bush. In fact, Bush is almost as bad as Kerry in that regard. It is really a choice between two evils, if you limit yourself to these two. In some states, the wisest vote would be for a third party candidate. Only residents of the so called battleground states would be wise to vote for Bush over either the Libertarian or US Constitution Party candidate. That said, there is no state in which it would be wise to vote for Kerry, who is the worst of two evils.

KRAUTGUNNER
November 1, 2004, 08:56 AM
Leatherneck says, that he will vote for Dubya. What more can he do?!? ;) :cool:

The Real Hawkeye
November 1, 2004, 08:57 AM
I beg your pardon, I haven't understood your post...Look up the term WILCO. It means he agrees with you.

Akurat
November 1, 2004, 09:18 AM
No, Hawkeye. The race is between two men, just like a football game is between two teams. If Miami and New York are out on the field, who are you going to pick? Just as a fan at the game, you have the ability to influence the outcome of this game. Your entire future and your children's future depends on the outcome of this game. Your rights and the preservation of the only truly free country in the world depends on the outcome of this game.

Sure the rules didn't specify that you couldn't pick Seattle, but what the hell would you do that for? They're not even playing this week. This means you (read: we) lose no matter what.

Pick a team, folks, but make sure they're in the stadium.

Hawkmoon
November 1, 2004, 10:58 AM
No, Hawkeye. The race is between two men, just like a football game is between two teams. If Miami and New York are out on the field, who are you going to pick? Just as a fan at the game, you have the ability to influence the outcome of this game. Your entire future and your children's future depends on the outcome of this game. Your rights and the preservation of the only truly free country in the world depends on the outcome of this game.
Hawkeye is correct.

The two party system in this country is broken. Or, perhaps more accurately, the country is broken as a result of the dominant nature of the two party system and its ability to stifle meaningful debate.

Sunday a friend from Massachusetss was in town with his wife to visit his elderly mother. My wife and I stopped in to say hello. My friend's wife is Turkish and is only just initiating the citizenship process. She was lamenting the fact that she can't vote for Kerry. I asked her why she might want to vote for a proven liar, and her response was enlightening ... and frightening.

First, she would vote for Kerry because she dislikes Bush. Okay. That much fits my overall perception of this election. Few people are actually voting FOR anyone. Everyone is voting AGAINST someone. That in itself is a scathing condemnation of our entire system.

But my friend's Turkish wife then went on to say that she knows Kerry is lying to us, but it's okay "because that's just how the game is played." She seems to think it's perfectly acceptable for a candidate to lie in order to get elected, because once elected his "core values" will kick in and he'll act in an enlightened way for the betterment of us all.

I don't happen to agree with her that Kerry has any core values, but the real problem is that she probably represents a whole bunch of people who are so morally relativistic that they actually see nothing wrong with a candidate lying in order to get elected.

I asked her if it might not be better for the candidates to actually tell us the truth so WE could decide which way we want the government and the country to go. She got that deer-in-the-headlights look and never really answered the question.

I'm glad she can't vote.

But Massachusetts is a foregone conclusion. They are going to Kerry, so if I lived in MA my vote would not be watsed if I cast it for a third, fourth, or fifth party candidate. It would not affect the electoral college outcome, buit it WOULD add another tally in the "neither of the above" column to help demonstrrate that people are fed up with the two major parties.

That's why, if you live in a state that you know is going one way or the other, it is better to vote for some other candidate. Just to send the message that the two-party system is broken.

jefnvk
November 1, 2004, 12:35 PM
Nick, I feel there are a lot of people like you. They just don't get the press time that the pro-Kerry people do.

My vote is already sent out. I whole-heartedly disagree that the two-party system has been broken. Maybe at the local level, but definitely not at the national level. There are two people running for President this year. Since I'm here, I assume you know who is getting my vote.

Nick_90
November 1, 2004, 01:30 PM
Furious Styles: your French spelling is fine! Merci...

Dave R
November 1, 2004, 01:54 PM
Nick, thank you for sharing your views with us.

I will certainly vote for Mr. Bush.

And we all appreciate your support for aremd freedom, and determination to remain free at all odds.

Thumper
November 1, 2004, 01:55 PM
Leatherneck said message acknowledged and he will perform as requested.

So will I.

Atticus
November 1, 2004, 02:00 PM
You got it Nick 90....Roger (understood) Wilco (will comply).


" The origin of this phrase, which means "Yes, O.K., I understand you" dates back to the earliest days of wireless communication, when the Morse code letter R (dit-dah-dit) was used to indicate "O.K.--understood." As communications advanced to include voice capabilities, the military alpha code (Able, Baker, Charlie, etc.) was used as a logical extension of such single character responses. R=Roger=understood.

Of course, you always hear "Roger, Wilco, Over and Out" in terse military dramas. The additional verbiage means (Wilco) "Will Comply", (Over) "Message Complete--Reply Expected", and (Out) "Message Complete--No Reply Expected"."

Adam
November 1, 2004, 04:09 PM
Poland is one of three countries in the World (the only one in Europe)where in simulated elections Kerry lost his race to The White House incumbent. Go President Bush! We are with you. Good luck.

Freedom isn't free, peace isn't pretty...

cuchulainn
November 1, 2004, 04:25 PM
The race is between two men, just like a football game is between two teams. If Miami and New York are out on the field, who are you going to pick? :scrutiny: Um .... er ... OK, I'm voting for Bush tomorrow, but that's a false analogy. The race is between how many people are on the ballot.

TooTaxed
November 1, 2004, 04:46 PM
Our Swiss friend's post is right on target. Our national and international security has to be the over-ridingly important issue in this election...we can handle economic issues during the next Congress.

Each main candidate's strategy is completely different. Bush's strategy is to push the terrorists hard internationally where and when discovered...no safe sanctuary; those nations who aid terrorists are our enemies. Kerry's strategy to try to gain an uninterested Europe's support would allow time and sanctuarys to permit the terrorists to regroup, set up new training camps, regain resources including nuclear equipment, and plan new attacks. I would hate to see my grandson have to go into Iraq a third time...and likely other countries also.

Note that Bush's strategy has taken Iraq, Libya and Pakistan off the potential terrorist sanctuary list, and Iran is at bay...for any nation to permit terrorist training camps invites American action. That is certainly the best strategy, and one that is working.

fish2xs
November 2, 2004, 11:13 AM
Nick_90,

it must be lonely on your side of the pond. Do you consider yourself in the vast minority? I will gladly heed your request.


As far as 3rd, 4th, and 5th party candidates go, I will have to disagree with the pack here. In a 2 party system, political change is slow. However, this is usually good socially and economically. Imagine what would happen to small businesses, the backbone of our GDP, with radical policy changes.

For Example: I too was sucked in by the Ross Perot effect. That was a 3 party election and look what it got us? The only way Perot's ideas could change things politically would be if he continued to run, election after election, and forced the R's to start adopting some of his platform to begin winning voters - this could take > 1 lifetime.

Also, with a multiparty system, imagine a ticket where the following candidates are running:

Michael Moore
Joe Lieberman
A DNA clone of Ron Reagan
John McCain
Jeb Bush

2 days before the election, Michael Moore activists sneak past airport security and pack the front storage bays of the Lieberman campaign jet with mayonaise. His plane can't lift off -it crashes on takeoff killing all on board.

Moore wins.

2 party system may not be great, but I contend that it is better than a multiparty system we see in many banana republics.

2 party may suck - but it sucks less.

I am a republican for practical reasons, not because I love the overall platform.

jefnvk
November 2, 2004, 12:59 PM
Also, with a multiparty system, imagine a ticket where the following candidates are running:

Michael Moore
Joe Lieberman
A DNA clone of Ron Reagan
John McCain
Jeb Bush

2 days before the election, Michael Moore activists sneak past airport security and pack the front storage bays of the Lieberman campaign jet with mayonaise. His plane can't lift off -it crashes on takeoff killing all on board.

Moore wins.

:confused:

fish2xs
November 2, 2004, 01:06 PM
as the number of parties increase two things happen

1. the probability that you will find a 'hand in glove' candidate increases, but
2. the probability of a 'lunatic fringe' candidate winning (ie moore) also increases

i'll take my chances w/ 2 party

Waitone
November 2, 2004, 11:32 PM
BTW, Nick_90, welcome to The High Road and thanks for your comments on our election. Our old line media is woefully inadequate in reporting on attitudes in Europe.

My 2 cents. I get the biggest kick out of bellyaching about the two party system. It has served us just fine from day one. It seems to me the more we become enamoured with democracy the greater our longing for multiple parties.

Reality is the two parties suck right now because we let it suck. Every two years (read that: every two effin' years) we the voter can shut down all the garbage and nonsense oozing from Washington. Every two years the entire house of representatives is on the block. Every two years 1/3 of the senate is on the same block. If we really wanted to shake things up we could easily put this entire government into a tailspin. It takes getting mad and deciding not to take it any longer. It takes accepting the fact that the two parties are not democrats and spinelessrepublicans but instead Incumbants and Challengers.

I don't think additional parties will solve any perceived problems. I do think throwing out bums will help. The only problem is we tend to want to throw out the other guy's bum. Our own bum is doing just fine.

WEPS
November 3, 2004, 12:07 AM
im voting for dubya, to hell with kerry and his goons.

WEPS
November 3, 2004, 12:15 AM
spineless republicans???? it was the democrat that let the cole get bommed and did nothing in return. it was the democrat who dodged the draft and the resposibilty to his country only to be elected president by and ignorant country. it was the democrat who did nothing when the trade center was hit the first time. when the trade center was hit for a second time, it was the republican who bloodied the nose of our attackers and brought two countries to their knees. nuff said

RevDisk
November 3, 2004, 03:03 AM
Sorry, but I don't feel Bush is any better than Kerry at the core. Gun issues, yea. Bush is better in that he's not really anti-gun, nor is he pro-gun. I simply see two slimy politicians I wouldn't let in my house.

pbman
November 3, 2004, 03:10 AM
Thanks NIck.

Glad to see a few of you can still think for yourself.

Stand_Watie
November 3, 2004, 12:17 PM
Thanks Nick and Adam and Krautgunner, I did my part in Bush's (apparent) win anyway.

It's nice to know we still have friends in Europe, even if the political climate over there is more heavily tilted towards the other side of the political spectrum.

It's posts like this that remind me we shouldn't engage in the "They're all a bunch of idiots" mentality despite any given country having a plurality of people whom you disagree with.

Ktulu
November 3, 2004, 12:23 PM
I did my part Nick and it is my sincere hope that both of our great countries can remain armed and free.

Chut1st
November 3, 2004, 03:57 PM
Thanks, Nick, Adam and Krautgunner. Due to the largely biased media here in the US, we rarely get the opinions of Europeans who believe in and support President Bush. With friends like you, we cannot lose.

Adam
November 3, 2004, 04:21 PM
Thanks, Nick, Adam and Krautgunner. Due to the largely biased media here in the US, we rarely get the opinions of Europeans who believe in and support President Bush. With friends like you, we cannot lose.

Congratulations for all of you! I'm so happy today :D I will rise my glass for your victory of freedom and honor. You made a good choice.

Thank you.

Adam

Nick_90
November 3, 2004, 04:54 PM
Congratulations America!

You made the right choice, once again! The only regret is that Hillary is probably sipping champagne at the same time as us...

Good luck to President Bush and to the Republican Congress!

And now let's get back to work because the 2008 campaign has started today...


Nick

Atticus
November 3, 2004, 07:49 PM
It is good to hear from you Gents. The vast majority of Americans have no grudge against Europeans, and many of us proudly celebrate our ancestral links to Europe. I wish that there were a thousand more of you on these boards....it would give us all a brighter outlook for the future. Thanks!

If you enjoyed reading about "Plea from a European Friend" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!