This Year's Presidential Elections and the Peace Corps
| Leave a message below if you support John F. Kerry for President. You don't have to sign, but please leave a short message on the reason for your vote. |
John F. Kerry
| Leave a message below if you support John F. Kerry for President. You don't have to sign, but please leave a short message on the reason for your vote. |
| By Redefeat Bush 2004 (cpe-024-165-162-055.midsouth.rr.com - 24.165.162.55) on Monday, March 08, 2004 - 2:20 am: Edit Post |
Where do I start, there are soooooo many reasons why Kerry is the man and Dubya isn't...
Kerry: Handsome
Dubya: Silly
Kerry: Intelligent
Dubya: Intelligence failures
Kerry: Decorated hero
Dubya: AWOL--at least his records are
Kerry: JFK his role model
Dubya: A chip off the old Bush block
Kerry: Record of public service
Dubya: Record of public intoxication
Kerry: Inspires confidence
Dubya: Inspires fear
Kerry: What Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Dubya: What Would Jesus Do?
Kerry: Camp David
Dubya: Camp X-ray
Kerry: Check please!
Dubya: Take Mastercard?
Kerry: Botox to hide wrinkles
Dubya: Flightsuit to hide the big fat lie
...I could keep going with this.
Simply put, the bottom line for me is this: Anyone BUT Bush in 2004.
| By Alan Hickman (0-1pool56-45.nas6.little-rock1.ar.us.da.qwest.net - 65.132.56.45) on Monday, March 08, 2004 - 10:41 pm: Edit Post |
We need to put a new face on international relations.
| By Anne Herisson-Leplae (alpha3.csd.uwm.edu - 129.89.7.203) on Monday, March 08, 2004 - 10:51 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry's platform is closer to the Peace Corp's philosophy. I believe we will live in a more peaceful world under Kerry's leadership.
- Anne Herisson-Leplae - Morocco 1984 - 86
| By thinkaboutit (ppp20-pdx.dialoregon.net - 198.177.27.30) on Monday, March 08, 2004 - 10:55 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry is an unknown. What will he really do as president? I'm not sure. Bush is a known. A known I don't want as president. Bush acts out of his own interest, regardless of the consequences. Maybe that is the nature of every President. But Bush truly is blind to all else but his own personal desires - good or bad. His war was inexcusable. He attitude toward the U.S. and its citizens and its positive relationship with other countries - oh! I'm sorry he doesn't give a shell fish. I'll take the chance on Kerry.
| By Mary Garcia (l180101.mos.dialup.fsr.net - 64.126.180.101) on Monday, March 08, 2004 - 11:05 pm: Edit Post |
We've seen what Bush has done and the lies he has told.
Give Peace a chance
Give Kerry a chance
| By Peter Lee (adsl-68-75-70-181.dsl.milwwi.ameritech.net - 68.75.70.181) on Monday, March 08, 2004 - 11:26 pm: Edit Post |
Mostly for ABB reasons, but also because he seems smart and sensitive to issues of importance to RPCVs. It also doesn't hurt that he is a long distance cyclist and runner. Yeah!
| By bob utne (cache-ra07.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.252.7) on Monday, March 08, 2004 - 11:49 pm: Edit Post |
Unfortunately, few outside our borders respect or trust the Bush Administration. Kerry has the opportunity to restore both. Once accomplished, all PCVs will become proud USA ambassadors and find themselves welcomed in every village/town.
BTW, read the book "How to Change the World" by David Bornstein. Every PCV has a special opportunity to become a powerful "social entrepreneur".
| By Jim Fox (cache-ntc-aa03.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.26.8) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 12:02 am: Edit Post |
Along with everything else, Peace Corps can only benefit from removing the lying, self-serving Bush Administration, replacing it with a man who shows promise of intelligence, sensitivity, experience and restraint.
There's going to be a whole world of damage to cleanup and repair. Fences to mend, treaties to restore, fears to calm, even new hatreds and new terrorists to control. It's gonna be a horendous task, demanding the absolute best from all of us.
Bush's demonstrated self-serving opportunistic exploitation of simplistic fear, his bigotry, and his wanton use of violence, are clearly not up to the task of leadership in a modern, complex world. I believe Kerry is far more qualified, deserves a chance, and a strong measure of trust and hope.
Once things settle down, Peace Corps and RPCV's should take a major role in repairing and restoring the United States' institutions, and our squandered resources and leadership role on this ever-shrinking planet. It won't be easy; the damage is too great. I think Kerry will have the ability to lead, and to accept help.
| By Jeanine Borland (neda-6-252-16-afg.neda.af - 61.16.252.6) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 12:05 am: Edit Post |
As a evacuated PCV from Turkmenistan following the 11 Sept 2001 event, my life has been changed by Bush's inability to foster peace. Kerry seems to have the desire to put PCVs in the position they belong...respected peace makers representing a country that fosters peace instead of war.
| By John Crist (ip68-2-37-222.ph.ph.cox.net - 68.2.37.222) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 12:28 am: Edit Post |
Kerrys ideas about Peace Corps are reminicent of what I recall when I joined the Corps in 1962 after hearing the call for volunteers by JFK. I feel his ideas best represent the original reason we all joined the Peace Corps in the first place.
| By TedK (216-80-114-103.c3-0.grn-ubr1.chi-grn.il.cable.rcn.com - 216.80.114.103) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 12:33 am: Edit Post |
Kerry's just making campaign promises -- no way the PCorps can add that many volunteers or effectively manage to expand with the numbers he's proposing within his first four years. That said, Kerry's positions have a lot more to do with why I joined the Peace Corps and what I learned there. I'm also voting Democrat based on their environment rating (Kerry gets 97% from the League of Conservation Voters) and the Democrat position on health care.
Ted
Kyrgyzstan, '96-98
Chicago
| By Hunter Ellinger (h-66-134-32-81.hstqtx02.dynamic.covad.net - 66.134.32.81) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 12:56 am: Edit Post |
Peace is rooted in justice, which in turn is rooted in law. Bush is a vigilante who sets a destructive example even when he happens to lynch the right guy and launches deadly feuds in the process. The world needs for its strong nations to be willing to accept the rules they declare for others. Kerry supports this idea, Bush does not.
| By Jan PC (243-173-223-66.gci.net - 66.223.173.243) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 1:40 am: Edit Post |
No contest. Bush is absolutely the worst president never elected! No matter how bad Kerry is, he can't get below Bush.
| By Afghan III (sa16-p17.dreamscape.com - 209.217.195.144) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 4:27 am: Edit Post |
Although I am an RPCV, sadly I don't think the Peace Corps is relevant to this election. Bush has acted so arrogantly toward the ordinary people of this country, the rest of the world, and our natural and pulic resources, that I could not vote to rehire him. Even when he makes what I consider a sensible decision, he manages to explain it in a way that makes it seem obnoxious. He still hasn't owned up to his favoritism toward huge energy companies, which did so much to harm citizens of the West coast during the energy crisis. Remember his pal, "Kenney boy" Lay, who he used to speak so highly of?
| By Beth T. Harris (ip68-4-159-198.oc.oc.cox.net - 68.4.159.198) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 5:34 am: Edit Post |
This is truly a very dangerous time in the history of the U.S..The 2000 election was fraudulent. GB was not elected, he was selected. Yet very little or nothing was heard from the American people about this. Then in the past four year we have seen an assault on the constitution and our civil liberties. We were lead into an unjust war not of our making and our military are dying, or being maimed by the thousands. We have seen a vast erosion of the middle class and 2.5 million jobs lost. Soon our children will need to go the China to get a job. The Republicans control all branches of the government besides the media. Is this reflective of a democracy? As PCVs we have had the oppertunity to see less than perfect governments. But right now is our own country any better? The sadest thing is there has been little opposition from the Democrats. I do believe we must do every thing possible to get Bush out of the White House. But I'm not sure I have that much confidence in Kerry. There is a lot of anger from Democrats about Ralph Nader running again. I think this can be a positive thing because if he is able to mobilize young people, and gets the press to keep the issues on the front burner (I think the Republicans will do all they can for Nader because they believe it will take votes away for Kerry.)Also the other Democrats like Kucinich and Sharpton can also push Kerry to take a stand on issues. If Kerry is pushed to take a stronger stand on issues maybe Americans will not see the Democrats as being so passive. With all this said, I don't think politicians do anything unless they are pushed to do so. It is altimately up to all of us to be involved, if we want to see a change of direction this country is taking.
B.T.H.
California
| By revett (165.13.65.76) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 6:19 am: Edit Post |
This is a no brainer. Four more of Bush-Cheney and this country's future will dim exponentially. We have lost our sense of direction and, more importantly, our national values. Actually, "we" haven't; the administration has. Time for a change.
| By Jamie Robertson (dig-202.wcta.net - 216.189.131.212) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 7:55 am: Edit Post |
Time for a change has long since arrived. I can't believe that this (the possibility of supporting someone for president who believes war is a mainstream foreign policy tool and who has alienated most of the developed and developing world) could possibly be a question. If there is any question, the good effects on individual Americans that Peace Corps service is purported to have is simply an illusion.
| By Art Latham (alatham2-pc.cals.ncsu.edu - 152.1.115.29) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 8:00 am: Edit Post |
Chalk up one more RPCV who agrees with Mary Garcia. (above, 11:05 posting)
Kerry. Give Peace a Chance.
| By Janna M. Bremer (216.20.117.194) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 8:05 am: Edit Post |
The reputation of the United States has rarely been at a lower level. The arrogance of the Bush administration toward world opinion and our unwillingness to honor treaty commitments are embarrassing. John Kerry would help to change this situation. He has dignity and intelligence. Although he may have failed to convince some people that he has a strong commitment to the issues that RPCVs care about, I believe that he does have a commitment. Besides, the only thing that matters is that Bush is gone.
| By Jim Greene (lc0360.zianet.com - 216.234.194.103) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 8:18 am: Edit Post |
I was a volunteer during the Vietnam War and remember my feelings about being an American at that time. George Bush has revived that feeling in me. Several months after 9/11 I remember talking to a Portugese woman in a market in Lisbon (in March 2002) about her reaction to that action. She recalled her reaction and sympathy for the US after that action. Just a year later all that support from citizens worldwide had dissolved as Bush ignored the opposition of so many countries and alienated many people. Our country can't afford another 4 years ignorant foreign policy. John Kerry is committed to repairing the damage Bush has down. -- And doesn't it seem wierd for someone who wasn't democratically elected to be such a strong advocate for democracy in other nations?
| By Jim Mueller (106.leo.co.ls - 160.124.88.106) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 8:28 am: Edit Post |
As an RPCV and a current PCV I have felt the loss of respect for Americans overseas as a result of the current asministrations inept handling of foreign and domestic affairs. We need someone who can restore the once good reputation of the USA by earning the respect of the world community once again. This cannot happen with the current administration.
I am sure that John Kerry will deal responsibly with Peace Corps, not promise growth but fail to fund it. Peace Corps needs strengthening not growth for growth's sake. There are too many PCV's in the field for the assignments available.
| By Elizabeth McCambridge (205.215.222.250) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 8:56 am: Edit Post |
Your summary states it clearly "Bush's foreign policy has undercut the ideals of the Peace Corps."
Kerry is liberal and idealistic and has served many years in the trenches (literally and figuratively). I trust him. He will not undermine the ideals of the Peace Corps and he will support the PC with money and words.
| By Jennifer Cochran (132.235.167.28) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 8:59 am: Edit Post |
I can't imagine having served in the Peace Corps under Bush's administration. It would have seemed too ironic and too frustrating to represent our nation which has been coopted by his bellicose, terrorizing forces. I now work with international students who often speak of their positive experiences with Peace Corps Volunteers in their home countries. We need more of these stories, not stories of more nations being invaded and occupied by the United States military. Clearly Kerry is the better choice for a more peaceful American prescence in the world.
| By Sara S. (sdn-ap-026castocp0414.dialsprint.net - 65.179.233.160) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 9:00 am: Edit Post |
Bush says many things but follow through is important. Just saying he wants to support the Peace Corps is not enough. He hasn't pushed for his proposals so PC is no better off for his "wanting" to support the program. Would Kerry do better? That remains to be seen. I think we need to look further into a candidate that just what he wants to do for the organization though. Bush's foriegn policy is a disaster and I think that is ultimately harmful to the PC in the long run. I think the PC would do better under Kerry but we need to push him to really support the organization. His idea of sending high school grads to the Peace Corps in exchange for college tuition show me his lack of understanding of the organization and what it is trying to do. I don't think we need to be sending high schools grads to do the kind of work PC is trying to do. They need to be college grads with knowledge and skills. Many of the conturies PC goes to has plenty of unemployed high school grads. Give college grads a rebate on the college tuition they owe if they serve.
| By Carolyn K. Kroll (h-68-166-25-115.atlngahp.dynamic.covad.net - 68.166.25.115) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 9:13 am: Edit Post |
Kerry is the only one talking about the concept of national service for young people. Offsetting tuition costs to perform national service is a good proposal. This country has needed an alternative to military service for decades and Kerry is proposing one.
- Carolyn (Ghana PCV - '67-'69)
| By Robert R. McCord (pool-68-161-128-20.ny325.east.verizon.net - 68.161.128.20) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 9:53 am: Edit Post |
In general, the Bush administration has performed poorly on economic policy, foreign relations, human rights, environmental protection, education and every other major issue that I can think of. The Bush family's historical connection to the intelligence community,special interests (e.g. oil) and others, makes me think that the Peace Corps is just another "pawn in their game," as Dylan would say.
I support any Democratic candidate who has a chance of defeating Bush and sending him back to Texas. I also suggest that anyone read the book "Dynasty" to get a better feel for the real Bush agenda.
As for the Peace Corps itself, it is a great organization. Hopefully a new President will appoint a more qualified Director than the one we now have and the organization will not be politicized.
Robert R. McCord
Turkey 8 (1965-67)
| By Rich Morrow (ccsd-90-26.ccsd.k12.co.us - 166.113.90.26) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 10:38 am: Edit Post |
Kerry's whole approach to international affairs is much more in line with the goals of the Peace Corps than Bush's wild cowboy approach.
| By Sue Ann Allen (dialup-67.75.238.155.dial1.seattle.level3.net - 67.75.238.155) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 10:45 am: Edit Post |
My vote is for Kerry. In terms of his positions on international issues and domestic social and economic issues, his philosophy is more in tune with the goals of the Peace Corps. Bush's policies have been disastrous for the world and the environment. And, for any Nader supporters out there, while he has done great things in his consumer advocate niche, it is clear that Bush would not be in the White House if Nader voters had voted for Gore, so only vote for him if you REALLY see no difference between Bush and Kerry. After just a few months of Bush's first term, I think his policy decisions made clear the huge difference!
| By Anne Hedges (66.109.144.115.adsl.montana.com - 66.109.144.115) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 10:47 am: Edit Post |
The reason to vote for Kerry? Bush!
| By Arlen Albrecht (216.56.10.61) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 11:13 am: Edit Post |
How can we trust Bush--he lied to US about Iraq, he lied to US about his energy policy, he put US in a staggering debt, he is not a conservative-he is an EXTREAMIST. He will use the PC proposal to buy votes then say "we couldn't afford it". Kerry has integrety, I TRUST this man. I served 5 years in Colombia, Fiji and Chile, It was tough both phisically and mentally, Kerry served in Vietnam--we have mutural respect. He later fought to bring our troops home and vowed to make peace not war when ever possible. He will work with the UN as a world body instead of making a mockery of that institution.
| By Thomas (149.142.201.254) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 11:15 am: Edit Post |
While I support Kerry's service for college program, I would hope he includes master's level education in the program. Volunteer's with higher levels of existing skills will help the Peace Corps achieve it's goals.
Note: roughly 3/4 of the voting age population chose not to vote, and only half of registered voters voted. If the election was representative of the voting-age public, then there were by far more democrats that chose not to vote than greens that did, let alone disenchanted democrats that chose to vote green.
From a practical perspective, it may be easier and have a greater pay-off to put effort into getting people who share the democratic ideology to vote than trying to convince a small and somewhat passionate group of people to do something they feel strongly opposed to.
| By concerned RPCV (mail.architechture.org - 66.99.252.162) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 11:15 am: Edit Post |
Despite how the budget numbers/volunteer numbers compare on paper between Kerry and Bush, it seems that Kerry is more deserving of the RPCV vote. All the money in the world from Bush does no good if his foreign policy makes the international community hostile to the presence of PCVs in the field. As we all know, PCVs have immense impact in their communities creating goodwill about the United States, but it only goes so far when our government seems to be working very hard to alienate former allies and create an "us vs. them" mentality.
| By swworkman (65.113.91.50) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 11:29 am: Edit Post |
Kerry will be better than Bush; that is we can't help but get something different and GREAT chances are (looking at the record) this different will definately be better.
| By rebeccajasper (1cust111.tnt2.minneapolis3.mn.da.uu.net - 67.251.130.111) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 11:33 am: Edit Post |
I can't write it better than Jim Fox (see above).
| By kd (dhcp-028-189.cns.ohiou.edu - 132.235.28.189) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 12:25 pm: Edit Post |
I support Kerry because I destest Bush. But to Kerry's credit, I believe his world view is much closer to the one many RPCV's ascribe to, and thus he offers a chance for America to move away from the sickness that has overcome us through war and egotistical posturing. As both a former PCV and APCD, I do not happen to think huge numbers of volunteers flooding the field is a wise plan. But, Kerry's desire to send Americans enfused with Peace Corps spirit out into the world gives me hope--he understands the value of "each one teach one." Perhaps there IS a chance to connect once again with people deeply hurt by years of US disrespect, manipulation, and exploitation. I think Kerry is wise enough to listen to expert advice--15,000 is too many--and will temper his plan based on the reality of training, logistical, and safety issues. We know PCV's can make a difference. Vote for John Kerry!!!!
| By kevinmdoyle (81.199.8.116) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 1:06 pm: Edit Post |
The damage that George W. Bush has done to the reputation and good name of the United States overseas due to his shallow and corporate-friendly foreign policy, is a threat to peace, a threat to Peace Corps volunteers and others who live and work overseas, and a threat to sustainable development. Shrub must go. Before he starts WW III.
| By RPCV-APCD (88.41.171.66.subscriber.vzavenue.net - 66.171.41.88) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 1:11 pm: Edit Post |
It would be nice if presidential candidates and sitting presidents would drive their PC strategy by substantive program goals and objectives, rather than by catchy phrases and numbers in the field (10,000 by 2000 was Clinton's). Both dems and republicans have been putting forth superficial numbers-based campaigns for decades. To Bush's credit, he is one of only a couple of presidents since JFK to see his PC initiative supported by substantial increases in budgets approved by congress.
That said, I will vote for Kerry based on many factors ... env, health, civil liberties, foreign policy, etc. And the hope that he will commit to a worthy candidate for appointment as PC Director AND APPOINTMENT OF THE DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR WITHIN 3 MONTHS OF TAKING OFFICE (THIS IS IMPORTANT! it took both CLINTON AND BUSH 2 OVER A YEAR AND THIS NEGATIVELY AFFECTED LEADERSHIP, MORALE AND OPERATIONAL INTEGRITY WITHIN THE AGENCY).
| By Robert Rutherford (65-86-204-34.client.dsl.net - 65.86.204.34) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 1:54 pm: Edit Post |
Bush must go. Why? Because people like Mr. Katzen are being promoted under his watch.
| By Natasha Yates (0-1pool173-179.nas17.minneapolis1.mn.us.da.qwest.net - 67.4.173.179) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 2:00 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry for Pres. because Bush is such a dangerous disaster. However, I do not agree that a promise to be a PCV should grant a HS graduate four years free college tuition. Being a PCV should not be motivated as a way to pay off a financial debt. Pay the PCV a greater stipend upon completion of service but not a pre-volunteer payment of any kind.
| By Sandy Langley (cache-mtc-ab06.proxy.aol.com - 64.12.116.70) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 2:05 pm: Edit Post |
Bush has led our country DOWN a slippery slope. His
lies have cost us lives and credibility. Kerry at least promises a change.
| By Terese Condon (204.145.129.188) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 2:09 pm: Edit Post |
Bush has already shown that he does not care about what other countries feel about our actions. He has no regard for the United Nations and has a history of putting his Texas buddies ahead of the interest of others.
I do not blame other countries for fearing the US at this time for we have taken on a bully attitude. This is not the Peace Corp Mission.
Terese Condon
Ethiopia 1967-69
| By Danny Buck (sf-du175.cybermesa.com - 65.19.16.175) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 2:22 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry stood tall for peace in congressional hearings after his return from Viet Nam. If he can come from the place he testified from in those hearings, we would be well down the road towards improving international relations and a more peaceful world.
Bush stands tall for corporations and that's about it. If its good for Hallaburten, its good for Bush- not much of a policy in my book. He has not made the world a safer place to wage peace from.
Danny Buck
Ghana 1969
| By Linda L. (proxy02.usu.edu - 129.123.104.6) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 2:28 pm: Edit Post |
I am tired of the lies and deceptions from the Bush administration. Kerry brings hope for a much needed change and direction for both international and domestic policies. As a RPCV from the 70's, I maintain my idealism for peace and a policy of mutual respect between nations . I put my faith in Kerry.
| By James Joseph Alstrum (138.87.238.44) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 3:00 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry's life and record reflect a commitment to selfless service. In stark contrast, Bush's life and record as a so called "compassionate conservative" are synonomous with selfishness and greed-only helping those who need no help whether at home or abroad. Kerry represents the best of the baby-boomer generation while Bush is a model of contempt for basic decency and fairness. Kerry's proposals are more in keeping with the ideals which inspired most of us to join the Peace Corps in the first place.
Jim Alstrum RPCV Colombia 1968-1971
| By Dan Luckey (unused-209-74-57-254.unused.epix.net - 209.74.57.254) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 3:23 pm: Edit Post |
Bush said that Kerry wanted to cut back the intelligence budget over 1 billion dollars. This is the same intelligence organization (or organizations)that could not predict whether Iraq had WMD and they had over 1 billion dollars etc etc to find them. You tell me whether it was money well spent
| By Judith Merrill Ratcliffe (adsl-67-118-22-142.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net - 67.118.22.142) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 3:52 pm: Edit Post |
Bush is proud to call himself the "war president". His postures and policies are antithetical to the Peace Corps ideals of international understanding, cooperation, and activities that foster world peace. His administration has done more to promote war, environmental degradation, economic disparities, fear of other cultures and religions than any U.S. government that I can remember.
| By marvin wofford (gtw13-2.esc13.net - 170.76.20.253) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 4:13 pm: Edit Post |
Being from Texas, I know what a joke Shrub (G.W.) is. His administration has been a disaster. How could anyone vote for him? That is, anyone with any intelligence.
| By Robert J. Englund, M.D. (208.48.241.130) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 4:23 pm: Edit Post |
I worked hard for Governor/Doctor Howard Dean, but now am supporting John Kerry. The Bush administration is a disaster. Kerry has so much more to offer regarding the jobs, health care, the economy, the environment, and the Peace Corps.
Bob Englund, Nigeria XI, ('64-'66)
| By Mary Bruckenstein (cache-ra07.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.252.7) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 4:52 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry has lived in the real conflicts of the world and been able to grow thruogh those days and so the United States should grow in patince that is needed to allow other countries of the world find their own way to a government that is acceptable to them. We should not threaten and break down the United nations as Gearge Bush is doing. I have voted for kerry in the primary and will agin in November. As a RCV I do not think hinging education onto a volunteer stint of service is neede the reward is in the daily living and growing remember we recieve as much if not more than we give in all our overseas experinces. Mary Myers-Bruckenstein Ethiopia 1968-1970
| By Jack Cole (cache-dg05.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.208.137) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 4:58 pm: Edit Post |
Re-election of Bush would be a great disaster. No matter who runs against him must be elected. Having said this, I like Kerry because in contrast to Bush he is an honest man. He'll make mistakes but if he chooses his cabinet wisely our country will regain its stature.
| By paulw (69-164-123-49.sbtnvt.adelphia.net - 69.164.123.49) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 6:51 pm: Edit Post |
I was a Peace Corps volunteer more than 35 years ago.
The thought that George W. Bush represents ideals that the Peace Corps stands for never occured to me. How can a man who has destroyed so much of what America once meant to the rest of the world be considered preferable to anyone else in the context of fostering a healthy Peace Corps. I am no big fan of John Kerry, but there is no choice for me in this election. Bush is a disaster.
| By Mary Marx (67-40-33-117.dnvr.qwest.net - 67.40.33.117) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 7:11 pm: Edit Post |
If you really care about your future and the horrendous deficit that Bush is building up for you to pay off, you should vote for John Kerry. The Bush administration is not taxing and spending (something they like to blame the Democrats for doing) - it is a LOT worse! They are CHARGING and spending. Even with the current interest rates (being low), this deficit may never get paid back. This deficit (if it is ever paid off) will be coming out of your future inheritance.
| By Sanford Gaines (129-7-213-249.dhcp.uh.edu - 129.7.213.249) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 7:11 pm: Edit Post |
John Kerry has a sophisticated, complex understanding of the world -- just the kind of understanding that you get from being a PCV. I'm less concerned with how big he makes the PC and more concerned with the direction and structure of its programs. I trust him and his likely advisers with those choices. Bush's foreign policies are a disaster -- unilateral, arrogant, condescending, long on inspiring rhetoric and promises(e.g., AIDS in Africa)and very short on follow through. His support for the Peace Corps, while perhaps sincere, is shallow and self-serving. And he has left the volunteers in the field with an impossible task -- how to explain American foreign policy to the rest of the world.
| By Mary Duda (cache-ra07.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.252.7) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 9:35 pm: Edit Post |
The name of the organization we all served in and love so much is called the Peace Corps. Mr. Bush has not shown that he works hard to establish peace or good relationships with other countries. Bush doesn't show respect for other countries which is against the principles of the Peace Corps. John Kerry would be a much better leader for the US, the world and the Peace Corps! Mary Duda, India 25, 1966-1968
| By Robin Porter (wbar8.sea1-4-10-124-037.sea1.dsl-verizon.net - 4.10.124.37) on Tuesday, March 09, 2004 - 10:56 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry knows first-hand what war looks like. For this reason and many others, he will utilize the conflict resolution processes within international relations to the fullest extent. He also knows how Congress functions and will be able to get consensus from members on a Peace Corps expansion.
| By Jim Fox (cache-ntc-aa03.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.26.8) on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 1:37 am: Edit Post |
I hear that Kerry is very amenable to recieving information from all sources, and then making a considered judgement and decision when necessary. We need to get our ideas for a future Peace Corps role, to him.
We know the folly of playing the "PCV Numbers Game," -- tried several times before. Someone tell Kerry to back off from proposing gross PCV increases, and the idea of teen recruitment subsidies. Instead, we should send him better ideas for programs at all levels. I think he'll listen.
The greatest contribution from PC may come from the graduate ranks of older experienced and sensitive RPCV's in other positions of private and public service, -- consciously helping to clean up the mess. Our country and the world needs us again. It won't be easy.
| By Jim Beggs (ip-12-180-41-102.fireserve.net - 12.180.41.102) on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 11:52 am: Edit Post |
I agree (with y'all) Realizing that we're dealing with politicians here, I still think Kerry is more likely to effect policy shifts that foster Peace instead of the "might makes right" stance of the Neocons.
| By maris rombout (sdn-ap-025scfairp0334.dialsprint.net - 63.183.121.80) on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 2:53 pm: Edit Post |
we've all seen the famous Bush family promising quote"read my lips" from one president Bush. WE've also certainly seen too many of the Bush promises during George W. Bush's term to believe his outlandish promises. Let's give Kerry a chance.
| By Larry Steffensen (cache-ntc-aa03.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.26.8) on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 3:54 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry's proposal for expanding the Peace Corps makes good sense and would benefit not only the retunees but the host nations. Kerry has vision and the Bushes don't do the "vision thing" or "nuance".
| By Anonymous (sdn-ap-026dcwashp0096.dialsprint.net - 65.177.72.96) on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 7:42 pm: Edit Post |
Let's just start with Gaddi Vasquez and Jay Katzen
| By Eve Einselen (61.94.146.50) on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 7:49 am: Edit Post |
Bush and his cronies are scary; that's why.
| By Jeff Rose (205.244.127.6) on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 9:37 am: Edit Post |
We must unite as an unwavering voice that speaks for the hundreds of thousands of people we served as PCV's. Kerry's proposal would mend many of the aliances broken or neglected during the Bush Administration. It would also permit thousands of Americans to view America as the rest of the world views us. That, as we all know, brings a powerful understanding of the world at large. Kerry's plans for Service for Education would unequivocally shape the future of American foreign policy, in a more positive and progressive multilateral direction.
| By Jeff Rose (205.244.127.6) on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 9:58 am: Edit Post |
However, Kerry must initially minimize his proposed quantity of new PCV's to roll into the PC program.
It could potentially grow in the future. But such a leap would do more harm than good, damaging the already frail body of PC programs that currently exist. Perhaps Jim Fox has the right idea. We should write a proposal to better the program and lobby it to Kerry.
| By helent (c66-235-12-99.sea2.cablespeed.com - 66.235.12.99) on Thursday, March 11, 2004 - 6:42 pm: Edit Post |
bush = bad
| By Paul Guraedy (dsl65-168-59-169.tricountytel.com - 65.168.59.169) on Friday, March 12, 2004 - 5:31 pm: Edit Post |
We must restore freedom of oversite by citizenry, integrity and responsibility to our Government.
| By sralston (dpc6682009028.direcpc.com - 66.82.9.28) on Friday, March 12, 2004 - 9:21 pm: Edit Post |
Because, as RPCVs, we care about our country, our children, our friends and people in other countries here on mother Earth. I do not know how we can survive through four more years of this very dangerous Bush-man.
| By Joanne Marie Roll (joey) (cache-mtc-ab06.proxy.aol.com - 64.12.116.70) on Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 4:39 pm: Edit Post |
Men who went to Vietnam spend the rest of their lives trying to stop war. Men who didn't go to Vietnam spend the rest of their lives trying to prove it didn't matter. It did. Kerry gets my vote.
| By Jan Owen (pool-138-89-106-22.mad.east.verizon.net - 138.89.106.22) on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 10:14 am: Edit Post |
Simply check the history of the Peace Corps. Look at the rhetoric and the reality of the Peace Corps under various Democratic and then Republican administrations. If you honestly conlude that the Peace Corps is as well served by a Republican administration, check the history again.
The Peace Corps was the creation of a Democratic president and is more likely to benefit by the election of a Democrat to the White House than a Republican.
| By melissaluce (cf2.c004.g4.mrt.starband.net - 148.78.245.12) on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 7:55 pm: Edit Post |
I don't care if Bush increases PC budget to the equivalent of the current U.S. military budget, his administration's policies are BAD for the planet--politically, environmentally, morally.
I don't know what Kerry will do, but he can't possibly do a worse job than Bush.
| By dubs (cpe-024-165-162-055.midsouth.rr.com - 24.165.162.55) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 2:03 am: Edit Post |
Better that Bush leave Peace Corps alone--he would muck it up like everything else if he decided to really get involved with Peace Corps issues...like those kids in Willy Wonka's factory.
| By Carol Ann Lysek (dialup-ras25-253.eug.or.uspops.net - 64.28.61.253) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 2:04 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry's Peace Corps proposal doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The Peace Corps has never sent high school graduates overseas -- it has always been college graduates! Most countries need and want people with real expertise. That means college graduates with experience or people with real-life experience and expertise.
Kerry's proposal does not look like it is ready for prime time. I like Kerry and his idea of enlarging the Peace Corps but they need to work on this proposal to make it more than political rhetoric.
| By Ernest Joel Bowen (user-0ce2k44.cable.mindspring.com - 24.225.80.132) on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 5:19 pm: Edit Post |
Bombing people based on lies is not consistent with Peace Corps principles.
| By Mike McGahuey (209.135.244.198) on Thursday, March 18, 2004 - 9:15 am: Edit Post |
Winning the war on terrorism will not be achieved unilaterally. Instead of uniting the world against terroism in the days after 9/11, Bush divided it and has continued to drive the wedge since then. His Administration has gone out of its way to demonize and belittle those countries that questioned the WMD threats or that going to Bagdad was the best way to defeat al Queda. Bin Laden must be pleased with the help given by this Administration to his cause. Our natural allies now look for leadership elsewhere. Kerry will do what Bush should have done at the very beginning--be a member of a world family that works together to do what it takes to defeat terror. He understands that listening to others and negotiating is a sign of strength, not weakness.
| By --jim (cache-ntc-aa03.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.26.8) on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 11:24 am: Edit Post |
The campaign has started. Skilled and sophisticated neo-conservative propaganda is already demonizing Kerry, warping his words and then ridiculing him for inconsistency. In desperation, they’re throwing anything and everything they can.
Those of us working for world peace must not be naïve; it’s only gonna get worse, vicious and ugly.
The situation is already so bad, any attempts to understand, deal with or clean up the mess, will be misinterpreted and subject to stinging criticism. Yet it must be done; for us, our children, and our friends and co-workers around the world.
Terrorist threats, for many reasons are very real, having been aggravated, exploited and becoming worse. Kerry is applying for an impossible job, like replacing several hornets-nests, that someone else knocked down and set afire.
Peace Corps is the least of Kerry's problems, though likely part of the long-term solution.
No one can change the world, but we all can give it a nudge in the right direction. The world needs all of our efforts, now.
| By Bush adm software (35.41.171.66.subscriber.vzavenue.net - 66.171.41.35) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 1:08 pm: Edit Post |
In the year since the invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration has repeatedly shifted its justification for going to war and constantly changed its story on intelligence, the United Nations, reconstruction, political transition and the cost to the American taxpayer. More than anything, the administration's war in Iraq resembles a software program that, at first, works brilliantly, but then catches the user in a cycle of "fatal error" messages.
Here then, in Silicon Valley terms, is a review of the Bush administration's year in Iraq:
Saddam Hussein poses an 'imminent threat' to the American people.
Version 1.0 - Saddam Hussein is an imminent threat
Version 1.01 - Saddam Hussein is a gathering threat
Version 1.02 - Saddam Hussein poses a real and dangerous threat
Version 1.1 - The smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud
Version 1.2 - We can't afford to wait
Version 1.3 - We never said imminent
Version 1.3.1 - OK, maybe we did say it once or twice
Version 1.4 - We should have been more precise
Saddam Hussein is ready to use weapons of mass destruction.
Version 2.1 - Saddam has weapons of mass destruction
Version 2.2 - Saddam has nuclear weapons
Version 2.3 - Saddam has biological agents he's never accounted for
Version 2.3.1 - The trailers are mobile labs for producing chemical weapons
Version 2.3.2 - Unmanned aircraft are ready to spread Saddam's biological weapons
Version 2.4 - Saddam's going to make more of all these weapons
Version 2.5 - We all know where the weapons are
Version 2.5.1 - Well, Saddam has used weapons of mass destruction
Version 2.5.2 - Iraq is a big country. We'll find the weapons eventually.
Version 2.5.3 - Saddam had weapons of mass destruction programs
Version 2.5.4 - Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction program-related activities"
Version 2.5.5 - David Kay? Who's David Kay?
Version 2.6 - It's not about misleading the American people—Saddam Hussein is gone and that's the most important thing
The intelligence is clear.
Version 3.0 - We based our statements on our available intelligence
Version 3.1 - Saddam tried to buy uranium ore in Niger
Version 3.1.2 - Well, that was what the British told us
Version 3.1.3 - Did we tell you about Joe Wilson's wife?
Version 3.1.4 - Do you know a good lawyer?
Version 3.2 - The intelligence is absolutely clear
Version 3.2.1 - Intelligence is never 100 percent certain
Version 3.2.2 - We didn't manipulate the intelligence
Version 3.3 - There was no consensus within the intelligence community
Version 3.3.1 - We saw the same intelligence the last administration did
Saddam Hussein has deep ties to Al Qaeda.
Version 4.0 - Saddam has long-standing ties to Al Qaeda
Version 4.0.1 - You can't distinguish between Saddam and Al Qaeda
Version 4.0.2 - There is an Al Qaeda terrorist network in Iraq
Version 4.0.3 - Saddam has provided Al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training.
Version 4.0.4 - Saddam will give his weapons to Al Qaeda
Version 4.0.5 - Colin Powell: I have not seen smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection [between Al Qaeda and Iraq]
Version 4.0.6 - Vice President Cheney: I still believe there's a connection.
Version 4.0.7 - CIA Director George Tenet: I told Dick not to say that.
The United Nations just can't handle this.
Version 5.0 - The UN had 12 years to deal with this
Version 5.1 - We don't trust the UN to handle this
Version 5.1.1 - We don't need the UN's help
Version 5.1.2 - The UN should play a vital, but not central role
Version 5.1.3 - You there, UN, tell Ayatollah Sistani that elections aren't possible
Version 5.1.4 - UN, please oversee the election process
Version 5.1.5 - Pretty please? We'll pay our dues
The war in Iraq won't hurt our efforts in Afghanistan or the hunt for bin Laden.
Version 6.0 - Iraq won't affect our hunt for bin Laden
Version 6.1 - Assets have been moved from Afghanistan to Iraq
Version 6.1.1 - Assets are being returned to Afghanistan
Version 6.2 - We're mounting a spring offensive against bin Laden
Version 6.2.1 - We'll catch bin Laden this year
Version 6.2.2 - We hope to catch bin Laden this year
Version 6.3 - Even if we catch bin Laden, the threat will still exist.
Mission accomplished.
Version 7.0 - We won't need hundreds of thousands of troops—that's wildly off the mark
Version 7.1 - Mission accomplished
Version 7.1.1 - We'll stay as long as needed and not one day more
Version 7.1.2 - The troops will be home in six months
Version 7.1.3 - The Iraqi Army will provide security
Version 7.1.4 - Where's the Iraqi Army?
Version 7.1.5 - We've disbanded the Iraqi Army
Version 7.1.3 - The troops will stay a year and be replaced
Version 7.2 - We're training the Iraqi army—Iraqification will work
Version 7.2.1 - We don't need any more American troops
Version 7.2.2 - Well, maybe we do
Version 7.2.3 - We're keeping 30,000 more troops on active duty than were authorized
Version 7.2.4 - We don't know if this increase in troops is a spike or a plateau
Version 7.2.5 - We're establishing stop loss so troops can't leave
Version 7.2.6 - The Army is planning multi-year rotations
The cost to the American taxpayer.
Version 8.0 - Economic advisor Larry Lindsey: The war will cost $200 billion
Version 8.0.1 - President Bush: You're fired!
Version 8.1 - The war will pay for itself very quickly
Version 8.1.1 - Iraqi oil revenue will pay for reconstruction
Version 8.2 - Our allies will help us
Version 8.3 - We'll pay for the war through supplementals
Version 8.3.1 - Congress wouldn't let us put it in the budget
Version 8.3.2 - Can we please have $87 billion?
Version 8.3.3 - Well, we really can't calculate what it will cost...
Version 8.3.4 - Well, maybe we can—$50 billion may be on the low side
Version 8.3.5 - Ask us after November 2...
Democracy comes to Iraq.
Version 9.0 - We will be greeted as liberators
Version 9.0.1 - We'll establish democracy in Iraq
Version 9.1 - We'll turn this back to the Iraqis quickly
Version 9.1.1 - President Chalabi will be welcomed with open arms
Version 9.1.2 - Well, not so fast—we're prohibiting political parties
Version 9.2 - We have the November 15 agreement—it's unchangeable
Version 9.2.1 - We will appoint a small governing council
Version 9.2.2 - Well, maybe a larger one
Version 9.3 - We don't favor elections
Version 9.3.1 - Caucuses work in Iowa, why not Iraq?
Version 9.3.2 - OK fine, we'll have elections
Version 9.4 - We can't return sovereignty until there is a constitution
Version 9.4.1 - Never mind, we'll turn over sovereignty first
Version 9.4.2 - We need to return this to the Iraqis—How about June 30?
Version 9.4.3 - We're still focused on elections—the ones on November 2
The bottom line.
Version 10.0 - Trust us. We know what we're doing
| By charlotte Utting (146.seattle-11-13rs.wa.dial-access.att.net - 12.72.230.146) on Sunday, March 28, 2004 - 3:21 am: Edit Post |
I was a twice-serving PCV in Senegal and Cameroun, and also a 5-year PC recruiter. I was (and still am) a strong supporter of both Kucenich and Dean, and wish that more voters had voted their conscience rather than feelings of "electability" at the caucuses and primaries to date. I still hope that these two will make an effort to have their more out-of-the-mainstream- views reflected in the centrist Democratic Leadership Council platform which supports Kerry. As for Kerry's statements on Peace Corps, I disagree strongly both with his proposed dramatic increase in numbers of PCVs and his call for high school graduates to enter the PC with the promise of four years of college tuition upon completion of service, just as I disagree with Gadi Vasquez's proposal of recruiting graduates of 2-year community colleges for PC service. We need mature, life-experienced volunteers who will earn the respect of host country nationals, and we must be certain that countries requesting PCVs are doing so for genuine need and not under U.S. political pressure.
| By Susanne Boyd (dhcp-070-134.cns.ohiou.edu - 132.235.70.134) on Monday, March 29, 2004 - 9:27 am: Edit Post |
Why support Kerry? I hardly know where to begin! Perhaps because George Bush has destroyed our good image abroad and turned our allies against us. Perhaps because Bush has played into the hands of the terrorists by invading Iraq and making the world even more unsafe. Perhaps because Bush ignores the Israeli-Palestinian problem, allowing Sharon to dictate policy there. I think RPCV's have to look beyond funding issues for the Peace Corps, and look to the state of the world. Kerry may not be perfect, but he is not as scary as our current administration
| By John Thompson (cache-ra07.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.252.7) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 9:05 pm: Edit Post |
John Kerry has the integrity and authority necessary to restore the confidence of the world community in America's foreign policy. This confidence has been destroyed by bush's ignorant, unilateral actions.
| By David Cohen (4.236.51.92) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 9:32 pm: Edit Post |
An important part of the Peace Corps experience is representing the United States before the world in a positive manner. That has been undermined during the Bush Administration. Think back to 9/11 and its immediate aftermath. I don't know about you, but I was moved to tears by many of the actions of our friends overseas -- eg the Queen ordering that The Star Spangled Banner be played at the changing of the guards and Le Monde declaring in a banner headline We are all Americans. It was a horrible time, but it felt good to be an American, because it was obvious we meant something positive to the world. Compare that to our standing now in the world -- polls show that in Europe, George Bush is considered the single greatest threat to world peace. This Administration has squandered the goodwill we built up after 9/11 even worse than it has squandered the surplus. Only a Kerry Administration can restore our place in the world and fulfill the promises of the Peace Corps.
| By Peter Beardsley (host55.209.113.250.the-spa.com - 209.113.250.55) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 9:34 pm: Edit Post |
No one who follows the issues — foreign policy, the environment, the deficit, budget proposals that don't fund the things Bush says he supports, you name it — can possibly wish for a second term for this administration.
| By Hamadan66 (cache-ra07.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.252.7) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 9:41 pm: Edit Post |
Bush is the worst president we've ever had. It is imperative that he be defeated -- or re-defeated -- in November
| By Stephen Snow (user-0c99k60.cable.mindspring.com - 24.148.208.192) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 10:36 pm: Edit Post |
George Bush is a criminal who has, with the help of his criminal friends and cronies, done all he could do to divide a nation he promised to unite, steal from the poor to give to the rich and make the earth a far less safe, far more polluted place. It will take many years to undo the damage his sorry administration has done to this country and to the rest of the world. He is the most egregious liar we have had in the White House since Dick Nixon. At least Nixon understood foreign affairs. Bush understands nothing. His duplicity and double-dealing and corporate coddling are so blatant that I cannot believe the Republicans do not see it; it is just that they are as consumed by the same greed and evil that occupies Bush's life and so will not admit it. I cannot imagine ever, in more than 75 years, this nation having such a shameless, shameful person in the White House, a man so full of dualistic thinking and jingoistic rhetoric that he is disgusting almost beyond words.
| By David Cohen (dialup-4.236.51.92.dial1.newyork1.level3.net - 4.236.51.92) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 10:42 pm: Edit Post |
An important part of the Peace Corps experience is representing the United States before the world in a positive manner. That has been undermined during the Bush Administration. Think back to 9/11 and its immediate aftermath. I don't know about you, but I was moved to tears by many of the actions of our friends overseas -- eg the Queen ordering that The Star Spangled Banner be played at the changing of the guards and Le Monde declaring in a banner headline We are all Americans. It was a horrible time, but it felt good to be an American, because it was obvious we meant something positive to the world. Compare that to our standing now in the world -- polls show that in Europe, George Bush is considered the single greatest threat to world peace. This Administration has squandered the goodwill we built up after 9/11 even worse than it has squandered the surplus. Only a Kerry Administration can restore our place in the world and fulfill the promises of the Peace Corps.
| By Jim Barborak (cache-ra07.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.252.7) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 10:46 pm: Edit Post |
Kerry over Bush!
Here in Florida we have two Bushes to deal with! That is two too many. Dubya has turned record surpluses into record deficits, done everything in his power to roll back environmental protection, launched a reckless military operation without broad international support, and done little to help the needy in this country or abroad.
| By Wendy Rambo Shuford (152.163.252.7) on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 11:43 pm: Edit Post |
I have never been so worried about my country due to the behaviour of my Presicent before.I think Bush has been totally irresponsable on many levels.I do think Kerry has our country"s and the American people's best interest in mind as he works hard to win this election
| By Jerry Smetzer (108-102-237-24.gci.net - 24.237.102.108) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 1:39 am: Edit Post |
George Bush is making the world unsafe for Americans - including Peace Corps Volunteers - everywhere overseas. Bush may be proposing to increase the Peace Corps budget but he doesn't say anything about how and when he will allocate the funds to pay for it in the face of rapidly escalating military problems in Iraq caused by his own incompetence, and the incompetence of his lunatic NeoCon buddies, and Halliburton flunkies, and a collapsing federal tax base. John Kerry may be untried as a President, but he is not untried as a war hero, and the men under his command during war do not today question his heroism. By his heroism, and by his standing up in opposition to the Vietnam war John Kerry has made it clear where he stands on issues of war and peace. These are the issues in this election, and it is our job to figure out whether we agree or disagree with him. (Has anybody even yet figured out what George Bush was doing in Alabama when he was supposed to be on active duty with the Texas National Guard?) Gimme a break. Dump Bush. Vote Kerry for President in 2004. I am Jerry Smetzer. RPCV Afghanistan 1968-69.
| By Jennifer W. Fowler (64.205.39.210) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 7:32 am: Edit Post |
We need a strong leader who can cross cultures, listen to others and create opportunities for dialogue with world leaders in an era of globalization. Bush and his cabinet seem arrogant and exclusive. Free world leaders are under scrutiny when they support do business with Bush.
The American people must show the world that we are not UGLY and that we are able to do business, globally.
Bush's vain war has lead us to nothing but increased violence everywhere.
| By Ron Sandidge (62.243.101.66) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 7:52 am: Edit Post |
All of this by my peers and colleagues says it perfectly and peacefully:
* If you served, you know who is needed
* Do we have a choice?
* REGIME CHANGE
* Seeing Our Good Work Destroyed
* Prefer Kerry over Bush promisses any day.
* Anyone but Bush!
* Let's have some positive, honest leadership, for a change
* Bush's foreign policy dramactically lessens the safety of Americans abroad - including PCVs
* Our best chance for sane national policy!
* Peace Corps would be another child left behind with Bush
* Bush wants to politicize Peace Corps--this will destroy what it stands for
* Bush lacks PC values
* Ashcroft must go!
* Kerry Understands the World better than Bush
* Kerry over Dubya is a no-brainer.
| By Jane Marlow Willis (janeword) (202.129.1.4) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 9:25 am: Edit Post |
Kerry, injured himself, turned his boat around to rescue another sailor who went overboard.
He did not leave another sailor behind, and he will not leave the rest of us behind.
If he sees this poll, Bush will be vindictive enough to take it out on Peace Corps.
| By Mary Marx (168.103.201.79) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 10:03 am: Edit Post |
Unfortunately, the US lost its window of opportunity to have most of the world's support and sympathy after the 9/11 attacks by rushing into an unjustified war in Iraq...one that should have been orchestrated by the UN rather than the US. Now a large sector of the world feels much hatred for Bush's America. We may be able to give them some hope by electing a new President showing that the American people care even if their current President does not.
| By Ann Sheehan (pcp03276486pcs.reding01.pa.comcast.net - 68.82.217.114) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 10:03 am: Edit Post |
Why would those who served in the PEACE corps in developing nations around the world support someone who stole an election, enriches his friends, and has engaged this country in war?
| By Michael Driscoll Ethiopia 64-66 (mail.ci.stpaul.mn.us - 209.46.83.2) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 10:14 am: Edit Post |
I agree with all of those who have not made their support for Kerry contingent on whatever the future of the Peace Corps may be. The Peace Corps' future - and future effectiveness - will be largely dependent on the election of a person who can restore the integrity of the U.S. in the world community and who will show the humility that is necessary to do this.
The image of a swaggering Bush is just that - an image. There is no moral or intellectual substance - and no human compassion for either the poor of this country or of the world. Bush and his contingent of angry, appointed right-wing, militaristic cohorts have already done serious damage to both the historic values this country once stood for, as well as inculcated true hatred among many around the world.
It's time for a return to a strong and decent foreign policy that is multilateral and world-community based, as well as for an economic policy that tries to create a balance between and among the various economic and ethnic groups in this country.
| By Gail Hughes (199.17.20.97) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 10:50 am: Edit Post |
Kerry seems to be an honest and competent man. On the other hand, Bush is a war criminal who should be tried for Crimes Against Humanity. There's no contest between the two!
| By GeorgeOrwell (35.12.21.221) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 11:35 am: Edit Post |
What's all the fuss? The war is going well for Oceania. We have always been at peace in Eurasia. War is peace. Have a Freedom Fry and be content: Big Brother is watching us.
My only question is: After Bush is "re-elected" in November, will females also be enscripted when the draft is re-enacted? This is a brave new world of equality, afterall.
| By Jan Yaeger (209.165.158.179) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 11:45 am: Edit Post |
There are far too many reasons to even begin listing. Not rhetoric - reality. If we are to have any hope of positive international relations and honest government accountable to its citizens at home, Bush has got to go.
| By Debra Snell (appli-1249-opt.gsu.edu - 131.96.51.12) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 12:11 pm: Edit Post |
Because he is ruining democracy. Wake up people! Civil rights, environment and appointment of right wing judges! How much more can we stand?
| By Cathy Kleinsmith (166.34.145.34) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 12:19 pm: Edit Post |
Bush touts democracy--and then when he doesn't get what HE wants (like a Judge on some court) or nations to agree on a war, he forgets democracy and does whatever is necessary to get what HE wants. Of course, the precedent was set when democracy was short changed, and he was selected by the Supreme Court. He's not a President--he's a King.
| By Terry Linkletter (12.129.16.131) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 12:32 pm: Edit Post |
What saddens me the most is that Kerry and the world will have to live with Bush's debacle. We have to reverse the momentum to get humankind moving again in the positive direction.
| By Robert Perry (216.185.238.12) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 12:51 pm: Edit Post |
I think that it is important that we have someone like Kerry in office -- someone who has a deep understanding of the need to work closely with the world community, rather than in a recklessly unilateral way (as I see the Bush administration has). I believe that a Kerry presidency would be a sign to thoughtful people around the world that the U.S. is genuinely interested in regaining some measure of respect in the international community -- a respect gained from policies that genuinely promote the welfare of all of the world's people.
| By EduCourse (152.163.252.7) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 1:44 pm: Edit Post |
I do not trust Bush. He led us to believe that the U.S. was in danger from Saddam Hussain when we were not. He is lying about Kerry's positions on public policy and taxes. Visit http:// www.FactCheck.org. I find it very difficult to believe an adminstration that misleads. If it is wrong about Iracq, how can it be trusted about anything else?
| By Shari Cohen (68.107.22.25) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 2:29 pm: Edit Post |
As someone who continues to work in international development, I have had too many colleagues from other countries ask me, "Why does America put up with Bush? He is dangerous, cant you see that?" Of course I see it, many people I know see it and yet, here we are desperately trying to change the out of control course that the Bush Family has set for this country. As so many here have already said, its time to get America back to what it could be - a nation of compassionate leadership; a nation that has the world clout to bring countries together to improve the plight of humanity, not to degrade and destroy it.
Do I care about Kerry's Peace Corps plan? Hell no. Personally, until and unless PC can start hiring the best person to head PC (instead of useless Presidentially appointed tools who mainly use PC as a career stepping stool) it has no business expandin any programming. Hell, PC cant even guarantee safety to its own charges, its in no position to expand.
Do I like Kerry's "service for education" idea? Definately. How doable it is, well thats another issue. They've been doing this same thing in Botswana, my country of service, for decades now and its a programme that works and it just makes good sense.
The bottom line is this, I dont think we have any other option but Kerry at this point. People who usually vote along third party lines need to get it together this year and support Kerry as well. It is clear that another 4 years under Bush could very well leave the greatest country in the world as the world's largest pariah state, and could very well lead us into WWIII...that is my biggest fear, not the expansion of the Peace Corps!
| By pam kefi (216-237-50-190.orange.nextweb.net - 216.237.50.190) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 5:00 pm: Edit Post |
isnt it obvious?........Kerry is a democrat with concerns for humanity and peace!
| By Carolyn J. Kinsman (cache-dtc-aa07.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.116.11) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 5:50 pm: Edit Post |
We must, must, must support John Kerry and get rid of George Bush; then we must continue to be vigilant and hold Kerry accountable for bringing this government back in line with values and practices that begin to restore some of our credibility and integrity around the globe. We cannot afford another Bush term unless we are committed to the idea that at least Bush will "bring down the empire" more quickly so that fewer will suffer from our emperialist behavior. There must be a better way!
| By Jay, India 37 (dsl-63-194-153-55.coastside.net - 63.194.153.55) on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 6:49 pm: Edit Post |
Bush is
- Immoral
- Irrational, and
- Illegal