dbguru got the best of my curiosity. If you are currently active duty and have yet to attain the rank of E7 this question is for you. No explanation is necessary but feel free.

Do you believe that Kerry understands the common soldier?

only the 3 minutes for $2.00 hookers understood the common soldier.

Yo Rick: 3 minute $2.00 hookers, no wonder you type so fast LOL. In my time it was $2.00 for a short time (at least a half hour) and $5.00 for an overnight. JonR

I'm an E-8! Do you want MY opinion??

I think both Bush and Kerry suck and the two party system is killing us. We gotta choose between these two eggheads?? WTF! They both suck, but i'm voting for GWB again because I believe he is better than Kerry.

The lesser of two evils, if you will.

Yeaup.

MAC says it best. I think the logical lean is slightly towards either candidate, since neither is very strong.

BTW, think Bush understands ANY soldier????Much less one who's been in battle........

I am voting for GWB, although I wish he would pick a another VP to run with and toss Rummy out on his ear, and fire the CIA Director Tenet....but, we can all dream!

Bush is the lesser of two bad choices!

Charlie

Sonny? I could give a shiznit less if Bush served in the military or didn't, nor do I care if he missed some of his weekends. For me, an active duty military member, that BS is a non-issue.

The fact that Kerry DID serve in Vietnam is also a non-issue. What are you going to do to better the country TODAY? THAT is the issue.

Bringing up what they did in the past is nothing but a friggin' smear campaign. It's fodder for weak minded people to feed on.

Research their stance on issues (or lack thereof) important to you and make an informed decision based on YOUR research, not some microphone jockey's tilted opinion.

That's my $.02

the "BTW" comment was meant for Tony not you, MAC. And, I happen to agree with the "what have you done for me lately" stance. I only bring up past military garbage as a rebuttle to those who are trying to use it as a weapon for Bush.

Now, go take a chill pill and don't attack.....I wasn't attacking you.

I'm quite chilled, and I wasn't attacking. Just posting my thoughts. No harm intended.

What MACS said! E-6 here!
ET1(SW) USN, AD

Ahhhhh. My "shipmate" Clive... chimin' in. Where you been brutha?

Sonny - nope and I never said he did but he does show compassion towards them.

This was because someone stated that Kerry does and I have trouble believing that.

Neither MAC nor Clive gave a direct answer but I will take their vote for the lessor of two evils as a no Kerry does not.

MACS(SW),
No, the two-party system isn't killing us. It's the two-party system that gives the USA its political strength and stability. Our winner-take-all system gives the winning party a definite term in office to implement their plan, whatever it may be. At the end of the term the party asks for another term. If they were successful then the people will likely give them another term. If not, the people will turn the old guard out and elect someone else.

In a parlaimentary or proportional representation system the winning party is only one no-confidence vote away from losing power and the ability to implement their program.

One look at the Italy or Israel should be enough to scare anybody away from a parliamentary system.

In Italy there have been so many governments since WWII that I've lost count. I think its been 40, but I'm not sure. Imagine 40 federal elections in the USA over the past 60 years. NO THANKS!

In the case of Israel the problem isn't no-confidence votes, but the multitude of factions. In order to form a government the largest party must try to include enough factions to have a majority. Again, try to imagine the USA and the number of parties that would spring up. The country would disintegrate because there would not be a clear majority. NO THANKS!

I know the system we have isn't perfect, but its better than the alternatives.

Sorry for the rant but I appreciate you listening.

00 - the US was never meant to have a 2 party system. This keeps all non-memebers of these parties from having any chance at getting elected.

I am with MAC on that.

Hey Bassdude,

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/election04/parties.htm  which is a good article on our system and how it came to be.

For the second do a Google search on "Duverger's Law". It is a theory on why our system (and others) tends to move toward a two party system of government.

Interesting reads. I don’t have any problem with the two party system. I just think that we need better candidates.

bassdude,
I didn't say the USA was founded to have a two-party system. I said that we have a winner-take-all system. By its very nature a winner-take-all system will evolve into a two-party system over time because, in order to win, a party must be as inclusive as possible and still have an identity distinct from the other party.

Ones an elephant and ones a jack-ass. I'd say they are pretty distinct. LMFAO!!!

And to answer bassdude's question, no I do not think Kerry understands the common soldier. As I said in another post... most of your military men and women come from underprivileged backgrounds. How could Kerry OR Bush understand what THAT is like?

I am not going to claim that I understand our government and how it works (or doesn't work at times) but I do know that we need to get better. We have to figure out a way to weed out the corruption. We are no less corrupt than some of the countries we point fingers at... we are just better at hiding our flaws IMHO.

You can't tell me Bush and Cheney, both oil men, are not reaping some benefits from being in the White House. And before you liberals think i've lost my friggin' mind, you can't tell me that Kerry wouldn't use that position to HIS advantage either. I don't profess to know HOW to do it, but the smart people out there need to figure out a way to fix the corruption. Period.

It's not the two party system that's killing us. It's poorly informed voters with a "to hell with what's good for the country, what's in it for me" attitude. Those that don't bother to inform themselves are much more susceptable to a sound bite election.