Leave a message here if you think John Kerry's policies best support the spirit and mission of the Peace Corps

Peace Corps Online: Peace Corps News: Special Reports: May 10, 2004: Elections 2004: Leave a message here if you think John Kerry's policies best support the spirit and mission of the Peace Corps

The Presidential Elections and Returned Volunteers

This is our second informal poll of RPCV's issues and concerns in the Presidential Election.

Leave a message below if you think John F. Kerry's policies best support the spirit and mission of the Peace Corps. You don't have to sign, but please leave a short message on the reason for your vote.

John F. Kerry

By Dr Carol ( on Monday, May 10, 2004 - 10:33 pm: Edit Post

Kerry can hopefully reverse the arrogant Bush policies and help the envionment and guide us to non oil based energy future.

The neo cons have ruined all the world wide good will 9/11 gave us.

By Tim Krieger (cache-dtc-aa07.proxy.aol.com - on Monday, May 10, 2004 - 10:41 pm: Edit Post

If the Bush Administration had one iota of the experiences that Peace Corps Volunteers have seen of the the world, they would have not rushed us into the quagmire in which we find ourselves. The simplictic policies based on power and military superiority cannot understand the cultural, social and human spirit that makes up a compicated society such as Iraq. The understanding of the history and the make up of the human psychy, values, religion and cultural mores of a society will provide indications of what might happen when an intervention takes place. I fear that the policies of the Bush Administration never looked at these long range implications. Mr Kerry's policies of going to the International Community to lay a beginning for repairing the damage done maybe a way to find a way out of the situation we find our selves in. The inability of the Bush Administration to admit mistakes or to see the need to change its directions has led us deeper and deeper into the quagmire of Iraq.
There needs to be a new direction that allows for clear deliniation of the root of the problems and for the development of solutions. Solutions not based on the military stregth of America but its greater stregnths of compassion, democractic ideals, innovation and a greater sharing of our wealth and resources with the rest of the world. We are admired for our wealth and hated because we do not know how to share it. Unfortuneately most Americans have not perception of what the rest of the world is about. Some of us with Peace Corps experience have a beginning knowledge of what the rest of our world is about. Peace.

By Tim Krieger ( on Monday, May 10, 2004 - 10:50 pm: Edit Post

If the Bush Administration had used even a small degree of the experiences that Peace Corps Volunteers have seen of the the world, they would have not rushed us into the quagmire in which we find ourselves. The simplictic policies based on power and military superiority cannot understand the cultural, social and human spirit that make up a compicated society such as Iraq. The understanding of the history and the make up of the human psychy, values, religion and cultural mores of a society will provide indications of what might happen when an intervention takes place. I fear that the policies of the Bush Administration never looked at these long range implications. Mr Kerry's policies of going to the International Community to lay a beginning for repairing the damage done may be a way to find a way out of the situation we find our selves in. The inability of the Bush Administration to admit mistakes or to see the need to change its directions has led us deeper and deeper into the quagmire of Iraq. Unfortunately we also find oursleves in the midst of a deeply political time with the presidential elections. Continued power becomes the end rather than the good of the country. Real dabate on issues cannot be entertained and unfortunately Americans do not have the patience for in depth discussions.
There needs to be a new direction that allows for clear deliniation of the root of the problems and for the development of solutions. Solutions not based on the military strength of America but its greater stregnths of compassion, democractic ideals, innovation and a greater sharing of our wealth and resources with the rest of the world. We are admired for our wealth and hated because we do not know how to share it. Unfortuneately most Americans have no perception of what the rest of the world is about. Some of us with Peace Corps experience have a beginning knowledge of what the rest of our world is about. Peace.

By Sumner Sharpe (user-2ini8r6.dialup.mindspring.com - on Monday, May 10, 2004 - 11:45 pm: Edit Post

Simply put - enough of the arrogance, insensitivity, parochialism, and intolerance of the Bushies! It's time fo a change, and John Kerry who is open to ideas, is tolerant of others, understands that we are not alone in this world, and appreciates the value of public service and its possibilities will be good for the Peace Corps.

The Bush administration's failed foreign policies and international relationships have isolated us from the world. And their unwillingness and inability to understand and appreciate differences from their world views, and their limited world experiences, are contrary to the ethos of the Peace Corps.

Therefore, when this administration extols the virtues of the Peace Corps, it seems to me to be nothing more than a symbolic gesture by this administration to appear "compassionate" -- it's a sham! I believe that if this administration is allowed to continue, it will totally undermine the values upon which the Peace Corps was founded, and we will further withdraw into our isolationist shell.

By KEReynolds (adsl-67-124-230-157.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net - on Monday, May 10, 2004 - 11:51 pm: Edit Post

I feel more connected to intelligent discourse.

By don beck (host-217-159-14-177.satlynx.net - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 12:09 am: Edit Post

Anyone but Bush. Though Kerry has more intelligence and understanding of our place in the world.
Bush's arrogrance and superiority are relics of prehistoric world politics that MIGHT MAKES RIGHT.

By James J. Alstrum (isu154178.ilstu.edu - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 1:10 am: Edit Post

I think John Kerry has a better understanding of what John F. Kennedy wanted young Americans to do throughout the world by establishing the Peace Corps in the spirit of his inaugaral address when he declared "Ask not what your country can do for you but rather what you can do for your country."

By Bonnie Carlson (213-240-205-228.ddns.cablebg.net - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 5:30 am: Edit Post

John Kerry is our next best hope for reversing the damage done by the current administration on America's image abroad, which has never been at a lower point than it is now. I see evidence of that every day. I am tired of apologizing for being an American, feeling shame. I want to be proud of my nation again, and I can only hope that John Kerry can take us back to that place.

By Ron Seibel (spider-mtc-ad022.proxy.aol.com - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 6:07 am: Edit Post

I think Kerry is merely the "lesser" of two evils.
Kerry probably has no idea what Peace Corps is all about, but he is not the "great Satan" like Bush. Bush and his V.P. started this so-called war for OIL & MONEY. Bush for the oil end, the V.P. making it in the RE-CONSTRUCTION.

In the eyes of the world, the so-called terrorists have become freedom fighters, trying to drive out the evil Americans. Bush started a "war" that cannot be won. The British learned this in Northern Ireland. (Up the IRA!) Twenty years from now we'll still be fighting some portion of this war.

By Grover Hudson (hudson.user.msu.edu - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 8:02 am: Edit Post

The Peace Corps and the Bush administration have nothing in common. Bush policies are going to get PCVs killed --or all of us.
Grover Hudson
Ethiopia 1963-65

By Melissa Chesnut-Tangerman (vtelinet-216-66-107-37.vermontel.net - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 9:10 am: Edit Post

In our world, the more one knows about how the vast majority live, the more compassionate, informed and wise one's decisions will be. Bush appalls me, personally and politically. I am ashamed that he represents (and ruins) the United States' face to the world. Although I believe Kerry to be somewhat of a political hack, he seems to at least possess a heart.

By George Duncan (dhcp-57-130.dsl.telerama.com - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 9:17 am: Edit Post

John Kerry embodies the ideals of public service and dedication that have motivated Peace Corps Volunteers since 1961. His policies are consistent with the founding values of this country--values that have been a beacon of freedom and hope for people all around this world. George W. Bush contradicts these values, both in his words and most importantly in his actions. This is a crucial time for RPCVs to stand up and say we must return to sensible, intelligent, and morally-guided leadership. Support John Kerry. See www.JohnKerry.com.
George Duncan
Philippines 1965-67

By kathe mayer ( on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 9:46 am: Edit Post

I think Bush came into office wanting to finish "Daddy's War" and would do anything to do it. He is not atypical of many born again Christians who think they have the only answers. They seem to forget the golden rule of due to others as you would be done to and have shown NO respect for other cultures.

By Adrian J. Lozano (cpe-24-162-202-32.elp.rr.com - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 10:41 am: Edit Post

I don't believe that I have to add anything that has not already been stated other than Kerry is the Better man for the job hands down. I realized that when this chickenhead idiot stole office that he was going to take us down the path of blood, war, and bad economic times. You do not spread good will with 50 calibre bullets, 500 lbs laser guided bombs,or the blood of US servicemen/women, you don't declare victory after the first battle, and you should not declare yourself a Uniter and then let all of your rich "Good Buddies" run wild all over the country ripping off employee retirement funds and escaping anykind of punishment for it.

By DesiredChange (host17859.pge.com - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 10:43 am: Edit Post

I'm very concern about our country being run by an individual who on a regular basis violates the separation of church and state, threatens our constitutional foundation, a right wing Born Again religious believer who appears to believe that his "God" is the correct one to rule the world.

Our current OIL war is also because the USA did NOT want Russia, France and others to control the oil contracts!

First two priorities that the President of the United States should focus on are: 1) Public Education, and 2) The environment! Our current leader, who was not elected by the people, seems to believe that you do NOT want to educate all your citizens because you need uneducated to have unemployment to keep labor prices low. And that corporations can NOT survive if the environment does!!

The USA needs a leader that is intelligent, does not believe in pre-emptive strikes and considers the other leaders of the world important team players in controlling peaceful solutions to conflicts all over the world.

Besure you vote and that you get other to vote this next election!!

By Fred Werner ( on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 10:44 am: Edit Post

There were three at least three other Democratic candidates who are closer to the "spirit and mission of the Peace Corps" than Kerry. But even a dead wombat would be better than Bush.

By Terese Condon ( on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 11:45 am: Edit Post

I am not that confident about Kerry, however Bush is dangerious. It appears from the statements from his military commanders that the end justifies the means. We are bullies.

Terese Condon
Ethiopia 1967-1968

By Arlayne Clow ( on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 12:14 pm: Edit Post

I support John Kerry. I believe that the President of the USA should have experiences with other countries. I am also concerned that our domestic policies must receive considerable attention: environment, ours and throughout the world; education, equate monies spent for education starting pre-K through college or tech schools with money spent for military and prison maintenance; take the best ideas of others who were running for office; use Peace Corps principles involving listening, learning, and working with people from other nations, etc. Arlayne Clow, Vanuatu 1993-1996.

By John Deegan (webproxy04qfe0.sbi.com - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 12:24 pm: Edit Post

George Duncan

with all due respect, John Kerry does not represent the ideals of public service and dedication that the Peace Corps represents. He represents naked desire for power (at almost any cost), he represents the wealthy, he decieves, he pontificates without any action to back it up. As someone posted here, he has not authored one bill his entire time in office, not one. So, where is the public service? I think John Kerry is a close to the opposite of what the Peace Corps stands for as there is in politics, along with Bush probably but for different reasons.

By joycemaggio (rdu26-69-033.nc.rr.com - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 1:36 pm: Edit Post

The invasion of Iraq did not support the spirit and mission of the peace corps, nor do the current administration's anti-environmental policies. For these reasons (as well as others) I support John Kerry.

By Barbara Kelly (adsl-63-193-214-230.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 1:44 pm: Edit Post

Power and military superiority, paying no attention to differences in culture, history,religion and all that makes up a particular society, clearly makes us the aggressor. Bush has no concept of the region, its proud history and difficulties. He sends our troops into these countries, barreling in without any sensitivity or concern of what the people there might want or need. He and his group clearly do not listen to those who do know of these things or, if they hear of concerns, pass them off because they do not conform to their focus. Actions such as these are clearly against the policies of the Peace Corps, and hopefully, against those of John Kerry. As one who continues to believe the views of JFK and Sarge Shriver in starting the Peace Corps, I am embarrassed to be an American and be led by the current administration. We need a change, and if John Kerry is the individual who will get the votes for such a change, I do believe that he more closely embodies the Peace Corps views and ideals. He would be the best of the two to lead us through some healing to show the world that we are more of the kind of people we pretend to be.

By Marianne Q. Espinoza (sproxy2.state.de.us - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 3:40 pm: Edit Post

After having served for 2 1/2 years ('62-'65)overseas and then living in the country for 11 more years, I was able to appreciate the way people in another country view us. I still have friends and (former)family members in Peru. I found that, as a group, we were looked on with suspicion...as agents of the government, but as individuals we were accepted as who we were. The policies of Pres. Bush appear to "lord it over" anyone who does not think as he does. This perpetuates the 'ugly American' stereotype that the Peace Corps has tried to erase over all these years. Kerry appears to have a more realistic view of how we are perceived in the world and a better grasp on how to deal with the history, culture, and human elements outside of the USofA.

By Marilyn Thomas ( on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 5:30 pm: Edit Post

I am very afraid for the U.S. if Bush gets re-elected. He has inflicted too much damage in his first term. I am hopeful that Americans will elect John Kerry as the next president.

Marilyn Thomas RPCV

Afghanistan 1966 - 1967
Kenya 2001 - 2003

By suzanne russin (h-68-167-65-179.nycmny83.dynamic.covad.net - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 6:15 pm: Edit Post

if only we could get Kerry to be more charismatic and energize the voting and non voting populace, I'd feel more confident about our future. Our inability to relate to other cultures and values is appalling. We can only hope separation of church and state holds up and we can begin to repair the damage of the Bush years...organize your neighbors and family to get political and get involved. Suzanne Wilcock Russin
Cote D'Ivoire 1968-1970

By Truthinadvertising (webproxy04qfe0.sbi.com - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 7:05 pm: Edit Post

Our inability to relate to other cultures and values has nothing to do with Bush. Heck, the Peace Corps as an institution is evidence of only a flicker of light in our community in that regard. It has been since its creation.

However, having travelled to over 60 countries, lived in 8, and worked in 5, for over 7 years, I would say that we Americans have more understanding of different cultures as a whole than any other culture. That is also not attributable to Bush. Truth is the world is not much for differences or change or understanding, though people are generally good. And we are not much better, though we are in these regards better.

By Dean Bliss (cache-rf04.proxy.aol.com - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 7:17 pm: Edit Post

In reading the messages already posted, I find the common theme to be, "Anyone but Bush."

I concur in that I find much to dislike about Bush both in terms of him personally and of his actions as President. Yet there is little about Kerry that would inspire me to take to the streets as his advocate.

Since even a neutral is better than a negative, my vote will go to Kerry as our best available hope to improve life in this country as well as this nation's international image.

Dean Bliss
Libya 1968-1969
Afghanistan 1970-1973

By RPCVinLA (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade9b-59.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 8:31 pm: Edit Post

So much hyperbole (at best) on this board, and very little intelligent discussion. Its a disgrace to the Peace Corps. No war lives up to the spirit of the Peace Corps, not even WW1, or WW2 or our own revolution. Nevertheless, war sometimes is the last and only option, whether or not you agree that IRAQ should have happened. The world is not made of peace-loving, harmony-loving Buddhists (and neither is the Buddhist religion). The public was against WW2, and anyone here wonder where we would be if Hitler had won? Im not arguing for war, Im arguing against the kind of mind-numbing mudslinging on this board that pales against the ideals of the Corps.

It is pure fantasy to suggest this war was about oil or money or Bush wanting to finish daddys war. Such comments smack of fanaticism (let alone ignorance of how our government works) and the Peace Corps was never about such narrow-mindedness. I do not feel many of those making such ridiculous fanatical comments represent Peace Corps values any more than Bush does. McCarthyism is alive and well on this board.


By Renita ( on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 - 11:47 pm: Edit Post

It is so sad that our nation is in Mr. Bush's war or is this called a conflict...? I hope John Kerry can get us out of this mess, someone has to do it or we're in for an interesting four more years.

Kenya 87-89

By alida buchanan (adsl-69-110-0-68.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net - on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 12:16 am: Edit Post

I am in the anybody but Bush camp, so I do not think that he embodies PC goals.

By Josh Evans (64118105110.sierratel.com - on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 12:21 am: Edit Post

Although Neither one is really good (We really needed Dennis Kucinich) the top priority is getting rid of Bush. He is a crime against humanity.

By RPCVinLA (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade9b-59.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 12:40 am: Edit Post

This is John Kerry's war too, he did vote for it. So, he got us into this mess too. Dont let facts get in the way of your opinions though.

Funny, I dont see people crying out for us to leave Europe of Japan after 60 years, or Korea after 50 years. Our armies are still there, long after our 9 year Occupation in Europe, 7 year Occupation in Japan (not counting Okinawa), and what many Koreans believe is still an Occupation of S. Korea today. Can someone please explain that, being that many are so adamant here about abandoning IRAQ? Guess Arabs dont deserve our commitment, like Europeans and Asians.


By RPCVinLA (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade9b-59.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 12:50 am: Edit Post

The Occupation of Japan, by Mizuko Ito

As I scan the news reports about the US occupation of Iraq, I find myself flashing back on scenes from the end of WWII. Not that I was alive at the time. But I have vivid memories of the occupation as experienced by my mother, my uncles, and grandmother: my grandfather dying of tuberculosis before the surrender, my disillusioned uncle leaving Japan for the US stunned by the depth of the Japanese wartime propaganda machine, the Occupation land reform stripping our family of our status as provincial landlord, our family katana being taken away by Occupation forces, and my mother savoring the taste of chocolate and chewing gum distributed by American GIs. From all the scenes, one image is indelibly clear. This is the story through the eyes of my mother, just a child at the time, peeking out from the gaps in the fusuma to our genkan in our home in Northern Japan:

The Americans had arrived in our hometown. We had gotten word that they were going to use our home, the largest house in the area, as their local headquarters. Our household gathered, kneeling, at our genkan, steeled to face the occupiers. My great grandmother, nearly blind at the time, was the head of the household, and her daughter and two sons flanked her, the grandchildren shooed off to hidden rooms. As the soldiers entered our home, they started to step up from the genkan into the home. My great grandmother, a battle-scarred early feminist, hissed, �gGet your filthly barbarian shoes off of my floor!�h The interpreter refused to interpret. The soldier insisted. Upon hearing the translation from the red-faced interpreter, the soldier sat on the floor and removed his boots, instructing his men to do the same. He apologized to my great grandmother. Now it was her turn to be surprised.

I�fve always considered this moment to be a pivotal one in the chanponization of our family, the first glimmerings of mutual respect for a radically different society that was so recently the enemy. I sometimes wonder what would have happened if the GI that came to my home had been a different sort of man, pushing aside a frail matriarch in a rush to survey his most recent conquest. I don't think resentment of the occupation disappeared after that encounter, and acceptance of the barbarisms of the West was slow in coming. But by my mother�fs generation, the majority of my family had moved to the US, or at least spent significant amounts of time abroad. This transnational shift is what makes me remember this moment as more true and defining in our postwar family history than the grumblings about lost swords and lost land.

I find myself wondering, like so many of us in the US are, how Iraqis are viewing the occupying Anglo-American forces. At the same time, I realize that this understanding is necessarily beyond my grasp. Every encounter will be a site of conflict and ambivalence, and maybe even, at times, resolution. My personal hope lies with the integrity of the troops on the ground. I nurture a faith that they will proceed with a humility and respect towards difference that has been absent among much of their leadership.

bio of Mr. Ito: http://www.itofisher.com/mito/


By Ralph Nordgren (dialup- - on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 8:14 am: Edit Post

It is sad that, in a supposedly democratic nation, the only choice we have at election time is a choice between the least of two evils. Both candidates are wealthy, elitist, politicians. When will we realize that we need to start electing honest working class people to political office and create new parties that will eliminate the polarization of the two party system that has been so detrimental to passing socially responsible legislation. Between the two candidates, however, the choice is clear. George Bush campaigned against nation buildng, yet emabarked on blatant nation building policies that do not consider the culture and sentiments of the these nations. He campaigned against big government, yet expanded government to increase his personal power and influence. His economic policies have led us into record deficits. He has surrounded himself with dangerous, self-serving politicians. The choice should be clear to anyone concerned with the future of our country and the Peace Corps.

By Gary DeBoer (dhcp-72-246.letu.edu - on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 1:27 pm: Edit Post

Does anyone know if Kerry's wife is related to our founder, Sgt. Shriver? I have heard that she is. And assuming she is related, how might this influence the future of the Peace Corps under a Kerry Administration?

By RepostThisEverywhere (webproxy06qfe0.ssmb.com - on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 3:58 pm: Edit Post

This is an excellent reason to vote for President Bush, and not for Kerry. But of course, the media and most RPCV's don't want to hear this kind of news, because it does not support their agendas. Read the below very closely before you vote- - - -and please don't embarass yourself by writing something crude or inappropriate about the soldier who wrote it. He and every other of our brothers, sisters, friends, neighbors, and colleagues that are fighting for freedom and peace deserve better than to have comments made to or about them like some that have been made in this forum. Let's show them the respect they need and deserve for once. Now read - - -

Subject: A letter from a medic in Iowa, serving in Iraq

As I head off to Baghdad for the final weeks of my stay in Iraq, I wanted to say thanks to all of you who did not believe the media. They have done a very poor job of covering everything that has happened. I am sorry that I have not been able to visit all of you during my two week leave back home.
And just so you can rest at night knowing something is happening in Iraq that is noteworthy, I thought I would pass this on to you. This is the list of things that has happened in Iraq recently:
* Over 400,000 kids have up-to-date immunizations.
* School attendance is up 80% from levels before the war.
* Over 1,500 schools have been renovated and rid of the weapons stored there so education can occur.
* The port of Uhm Qasar was renovated so grain can be off-loaded from ships faster.
* The country had its first 2 billion barrel export of oil in August.
* Over 4.5 million people have clean drinking water for the first time ever in Iraq.
* The country now receives 2 times the electrical power it did before the war.
* 100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed, compared to 35% before the war.
* Elections are taking place in every major city, and city councils are in place.
* Sewer and water lines are installed in every major city.
* Over 60,000 police are patrolling the streets.
* Over 100,000 Iraqi civil defense police are securing the country.
* Over 80,000 Iraqi soldiers are patrolling the streets side by side with US soldiers.
* Over 400,000 people have telephones for the first time ever.
* Students are taught field sanitation and hand washing techniques to prevent the spread of germs.
* An interim constitution has been signed.
* Girls are allowed to attend school.
* Textbooks that don't mention Saddam are in the schools for the first time in 30 years.

Don't believe for one second that these people do not want us there. I have met many, many people from Iraq that want us there, and in a bad way. They say they will never see the freedoms we talk about but they hope their children will. We are doing a good job in Iraq and I challenge anyone, anywhere to dispute me on these facts. So If you happen to run into John Kerry, be sure to give him my email address and send him to Denison, Iowa. This soldier will set him straight. If you are like me and very disgusted with how this period of rebuilding has been portrayed,
email this to a friend and let them know there are good things happening.

Ray Reynolds, SFC
Iowa Army National Guard
234th Signal Battalion

By Admin1 (admin) (pool-151-196-44-226.balt.east.verizon.net - on Thursday, May 13, 2004 - 12:36 am: Edit Post

The message above says in the last paragraph: "I challenge anyone, anywhere to dispute me on these facts"
TruthOrFiction.com is a web site where Internet users can get information about stories or messages that are circulated on the internet. TruthOrFiction.com checked into each one of the statements by Ray Reynolds and some were accurate, some were not. Another assessment of the message can be found here or you can do a google search for "Ray Reynolds, SFC" to find many other postings and discussions of the message on the web.

Best Regards,


By Truthinadvertising (webproxy06qfe0.ssmb.com - on Thursday, May 13, 2004 - 11:07 am: Edit Post

Bush Lied?? Bush took us to war for his oil buddies? Bush took us to war for his daddy? Bush is dangerous? Kerry is sensible?

read this and, if you are the fair minded people that I believe you to be. These are FACTUAL quotes from your very own, including Kerry, which are the most telling:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep.
Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003

Bush sent us to war for his oil buddies, for his daddy?? I didnt know John Kerry was into oil. Well, he is filthy rich.

By RPCV ( - on Thursday, May 13, 2004 - 12:33 pm: Edit Post

Actually, I believe most RPCVs do want to know what is being accomplished. And I'm sure virtually all appreciate and respect the soldiers working and fighting to achieve this progess. How sustainiable the accomplishments achieved to date in Iraq and Afghanistan are, how stability in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel-Palestine and the ME in general is achieved, and how we proceed with with humanitarian and sustainable development efforts are the matters at hand.

President Bush's administration has achieved a rather mixed record, a pattern of often myopic planning and failure of leadership at the top. Experts and advisors anticipated many of the problems that have evolved and could have been more effectively mitigated (not necessarily avoided)in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

It started with the looting of Baghdad and its unfortunate impact on public perception and support in Iraq, in the US and throughout the world. Looting and the attendant security issues had been anticipated well before the war started. We DID need more soldiers on the ground (once the war commenced), and that could have been accomplished without compromising the positive aspects of a leaner, faster occupation.

WMD and al Queda ties were the primary rationals for going to war. There are no WMD in Iraq and the terrorists opportunistically entered the country during the "fog of war". It was NOT necessary to start this war in 2003, after having built up forces in the region to the point of no return. Yes, Saddam needed to be removed. However, this could have been accomplished with a real international effort, and there's no convincing reason for not having done so.

It would have been advantageous to achieve more progress in Afghanistan and on the international coordination of combatting terrorism before taking action in Iraq. This approach was anticipated and advised by many within and outside the administration well in advance of the war in Iraq.

The abuse of prisoners in Iraq came about as a result of a failure in command. We based our war on high moral standards (i.e., taking the "moral high ground"). The message and lack of leadership from the top led to the failure of meeting those standards within the prison system, and it has hurt the US effort. This is why the world's indignation over the abuse of these prisoners will have more impact than the world's indignation over the beheading and murder of a US citizen by terrorists. Unfortunate and sad but true.

We'll need a new president capable of restoring respect and effective leadership in the world. I'll be voting for Kerry. He will see the Iraq and Afghanistan efforts through (war, stability and sustainable development assistance), as we must follow through on US commitments and make the best of the current situation.

By --jim (cache-ntc-aa03.proxy.aol.com - on Thursday, May 13, 2004 - 1:42 pm: Edit Post

The Ray Reynolds List of Accomplishments looks impressive, until you look closer.

(1) Many of the projects are simply repairs to infrastructure destruction or disruption caused by the first Gulf War, the ensuing embargo, and the present invasion. Net gain, not much.

(2) Considering the level of manpower, and costs expended, it's really not that much accomplished per the total expended effort and costs.

IF the Iraq invasion had been justifiable, due to conflicts of interests, (oil, military materiel and reconstruction profiteering), the Bush Cartel should have "recused" itself from execution of the war and reconstruction.

Now it is necessary for us to change regimes (giving other scoundrels a chance at the public trough). In the process, hopefully the Kerry (or other Democratic) alternatives will be less self-serving, more populist, and less of a direct threat to our basic Constitutional Freedoms and Democracy.

By RPCV cameroon (adsl-20-65-67.mem.bellsouth.net - on Thursday, May 13, 2004 - 2:43 pm: Edit Post

...Better check your facts on the Ray Reynolds letter, Gene. it has been widely circulated on the internet, added to, and distorted, and will soon achieve "URBAN LEGEND" status.

....I only wish this good news was all the news coming out of Iraq. Unfortunately, all the good news coming from Iraq is vastly, vastly, vastly overshadowed by all the hurt and pain, compliments of Bush and his policies. First the people of Iraq are made to suffer under Saddam, then further pain and humiliation under foreign occupation, in a pre-emptive war based on arrogance, lies, and misinformation.

...Blind optimism, as illustrated by this letter, your comments, and the current administration is pure denial...Someone needs to tell the emperor he has no clothes.

...or like the patient who goes to the dentist to have his teeth cleaned and ends up bleeding to death--hey at least he has no cavities.

By Dale Gilles ( on Friday, May 14, 2004 - 7:45 pm: Edit Post

I am a former PCV (Liberia IV - 64-67) and Staff member (PC/W - 60s and 90s -; PC/Liberia). I am currently retired, living in Thailand and loving it. However, for the first time in my decades of living and working overseas, I am embarrassed, ashamed and actually frightened at being an American. For most of the years that I have worked outside of the US, for the PC, NGOs and the UN, I have never really been concerned as to my nationality. But now, with George W. Bush as my president, my shame is overwhelming. I am a news freak, staying in touch with what is going on in the US and the World via the internet. Needless to say, WE NEED A CHANGE NOW. If America looses this opportunity to elect a man with the vision of John Kerry, I fear to think of the road to be travelled.

By RPCV Philippines (dsc02-oav-ca-204-31-252-127.rasserver.net - on Saturday, May 15, 2004 - 1:21 pm: Edit Post

Thanks to Bush all Americans are open targets now, no one in their right mind would be a Peace Corps Volunteer in this climate. We get sent out alone, in more than one example when a friend needed help while traveling outside the US, they were left to sink. Now only a fool would even think of leaving the US. Kerry is our guy, his education and experience tops the list.

By RPCVinLA (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade3a-166.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Saturday, May 15, 2004 - 7:06 pm: Edit Post

I just got back from Chile, Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay. I went by myself. I had no problems, nor felt at any time that I was a target. People were very welcoming. A friend of mine, a woman, is on her way to Africa. She has no such fears. You are speaking emotionally without any factual basis. In fact, millions of americans are traveling all over the world right now. Airline travel is back up. So, you are completely wrong. But go ahead, vote for Kerry. His education doesnt compare to Bush's, in fact. His money and privelege do, in fact, he is richer. His experience doesnt compare. He has not authored one piece of legislation the entire time he was in office. Not one. That is what you call a politician. Say anything to get elected, then do nothing. They both are horrible choices, Bush and Kerry.

By Daniel (0-1pool136-32.nas12.somerville1.ma.us.da.qwest.net - on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 8:31 am: Edit Post

RPCV Phillipines,

The facts are in for your comments. 31 Volunteers have died due to safety and health or been killed since 1996 while serving in Peace Corps. Many were serving alone due a policy the Bush Administration continued after Bill Clinton's. To me who has gone through a safety situation and been treated wrongfully upon real facts of my situation as a Peace Corps volunteer, it is less safe to join Peace Corps,than it was decades ago.

The facts are in 2,800 have been victims of violence since the 1990's and most have been treated poorly by the agency.

Bush has proven not to act to repair the real damage of the past.

Kerry won't either. The facts are he wants 25,000 thousand in service and he wants to send you to an Islamic country alone to learn about the arabic culture.

Kerry has not helped in the reforms of Peace Corps. That is a fact.

To say someone is completely "wrong" about safety and Peace Corps is skirting the truth. Emotional pleas are often backed up with reference points that are fact. However, it is whether the analyst or the reader is ready to accept certain facts that aren't neccessarily made public right away, such as Peace Corps holding back the records of "victims in safety situations".

It is a fact Peace Corps deliberately tried to cover up those facts to the public. The Dayton Daily news has had to file in Federal Court to get the real information.

The Resume comparison should not be brought into this discussion. Both are blue bloods and won't help Peace Corps safety. President Bush has brought us to a climate of war during his whole administration. Despite, your ability to travel and have leisure time to do it speak to your personal situation. Where are your facts about traveling abroad by AMERICANS?

The facts are in about the educational comparison. If you want to compare apples to oranges?

Kerry graduated from Yale and did well in terms of grades.

Bush got C's. He did alot of drinking until he found "god".

Kerry did serve in the vietnam war.

Bush did serve in Alabama guard and at the same time was working a campaign and was a yahoo at many local bars around the campaign. Probably watching the tube, saying, "boy it must be tough over there, as he raised another draft to his lips." (this is an assumption based on the fact that he would regularly speak about his hangovers in the campaign headquarters)

Kerry has medals. Many Presidents in recent years have not. The people diminishing those medals are a joke. He served and he got them because of his service.

Bush, he was driving a "plastic ash barrel around", that had got caught under his wheel after a drunken stupor around Kennebunkport, ME.. The police helped him home that night. Let us just say daddy, who was at home, was not too happy. This is a fact.

Bush became Governor of Texas and got to file legislation because of a "sweetheart deal with the contacts of his father". 15 million dollar deal, as part owner of the Texas Rangers. That was his rise to political fame. Alot more than the Kerry Condo deal.

Kerry plays an instrument, played ice hockey at yale while getting good grades, and tried to speak french with a parrot.

Bush: I am trying to figure out, what extra cirricular activities Bush was involved in? I have no facts.

I know he had to have gone to the library at least once to meet Laura.

I agree with you about doing nothing.

George Bush has managed statisically to drop most of the unemployed off the roles into underemployed work since Herbert Hoover. There is a fact. Bureau of Labor Statisics.

We have seen what Bush has done after he really did not get elected. About five people in the country are making decisions and our democracy has limited accountability more and more from my perspective.

The people are manipulated by the media with their (the media UPI and AP) reference points for facts.

RPCVLA, you are right we are left with "no choice. Except we could run ourselves or get involved locally."

Thanks for your comments traveling facts.


By daniel (0-1pool136-32.nas12.somerville1.ma.us.da.qwest.net - on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 8:44 am: Edit Post

To Ray Reynolds,

Thanks for entertaining this web site with your facts. Appreciate all the work you are doing.

We served without a gun.

Perhaps after your military service you will decide to join Peace Corps.

Cross cultural relations don't come, looking down the barrel of a gun. I think you have learned that during your work in Iraq.

Appreciate your respect for Peace Corps work.


By john paskevicz (d47-69-232-176.try.wideopenwest.com - on Monday, May 17, 2004 - 5:04 pm: Edit Post

I can envision J. Kerry in my place 37 years ago sitting on a dark, hot, packed 3rd class compartment of the train to Amritsar, (in the Punjab) in the middle of the night, being grilled by all manner of passengers about US aggression in Vietnam. Kerry has the intellectual capacity, understanding and ability to listen and enjoy the experience. I think Kerry sees life from a much different or better perspective than the present administration. I also believe he will support those of us who are disabled veterans to a greater extent than the present administration.

By --jim (cache-ntc-aa03.proxy.aol.com - on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 12:13 am: Edit Post

An Open Letter to Senator John Kerry,

It is coming time to rally 60%, the Concerned Citizen Patriots of America. Time to lead us out of The Mess, and to restore a world-class country that we all can be proud of again.

The country is ready for a true Leader to lead. It's time to rally the forces, with a strong vision of what the United States has been and can again be.

A vision, based on our best, rather than our worst. "American" in the finest, most practical sense of the term. Growth, cooperation, honor and strength; rather than fear, hatred, death and destruction. The American Dream.

We must get beyond simply reacting to Bush's dirty campaign attacks. That's a no-win mud-fight. You can keep it ambiguous, on the high-road to avoid ridicule and nit-picking, but that won't win in the long run.

We must move far beyond "Any Body But Bush." We're in the bag, we have no choice. On the right, many of Bush's true-believers care but cannot change.

For better or worse, this failed regime will continue to self-destruct; and the critical Middle Moderates will increasingly realize the obvious. With them, we must restore an overwhelming "American" coalition to take back our country.

Bush is a punk, a scared, spoiled little bully at heart. His core staff are equally flawed. Like the emperor, they wear no clothes. They have power, money, an evil-plan, and they have no shame; it will continue to be very ugly. It is increasingly obvious however, they have no claim on truth, logic nor on true American values. They are very vulnerable.

At some point you MUST take the lead, define the battle on your terms; rise to the top, go for the kill, and lead us past recovery.

If you (and the Democratic Party) can't win, then get out of the way and let someone else lead. This is a battle which, for the sake of the world must be won.

By Anonymous (hse-toronto-ppp185938.sympatico.ca - on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - 11:30 am: Edit Post

Kerry(s) is worth billions and the (senator deceased 1993 air plane accident)Heinz empire is providing financing to NGOs all over the globe. It is no wonder that his idea of leadership is writing checks to the UN, which has no interest in any nations having sovereignty or freedom.

The UN is always an enemy of a soveriegn nation.

By Anthony W. Dater, Nigeria IX (dialup- - on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - 1:08 pm: Edit Post

Senator Kerry has a much more nuanced and realistic view of the world. In this world, we all need multi-lateral coopertion to insure peace for all.

By Bridget Mulrooney (pcp02226747pcs.rte20201.de.comcast.net - on Thursday, May 27, 2004 - 3:22 pm: Edit Post

It is obvious that Bush does not support peace, therefore the Corps should definitely support John Kerry.

By RPCVinLA (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade10a-146.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 4:45 pm: Edit Post

yeah its obvious Bush is a warmonger, just wants to kill and maim ... like most of us. Where do people get this crap?

By concernedgreenteen (cache04.nyc.untd.com - on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 6:11 pm: Edit Post

no one is saying Kerry is perfect, but we all know that he is better than Bush Junior. Although Kerry may be flitty around some issues (aka most of them) he actually cares about the envirorment, and other people on the planet besides Americans. The people of Iraq were terrorized, but the was no reason besides profit and American's want for revenge to attack the country, we should have found a peaceful solution instead of entering guns-a-blazin.
Again, I'm not saying Kerry is perfect, but I do believe that he will think about the effects of his actions moreso than his fearsome opponent junior. Kerry has shown responsibility throughout his career and I think what some people are forgetting is that we don't expect perfection, we expect someone better than Bush.

By iLoveBush,thePrezThatis ( on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 4:32 pm: Edit Post

Bush knows what's right for the rest of the world. Good thing we got somebody in office that is so much smarter than most other world leaders. Thank god he's the commander in chief on this war on terror--his brilliant tactics are way over the heads of our nation's top generals. His environmental policies will save the planet for future generations forever and ever. His economic plan will raise the poor and unemployed by their bootstraps and make us all rich. His stand on social issues will free us all and fill our nation with brotherly and sisterly love. Bush is uniting us all, and is cleansing the office of the presidency with his integrity, commitment to justice, eloquence, and good looks. With Bush, we also get Jesus on our side....we can't lose with this team! It's like having a birthday, weekend, and Xmas all rolled into one!

Where do all you Kerry supporters get the load of crap that says anything to the contrary????

By RPCVinLA (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade10b-45.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Friday, June 04, 2004 - 1:28 pm: Edit Post

I cannot understand how Kerry, who for the better part of a year has been completely unable to even find a slogan for his campaign (failing miserably in that small task so many times), is asking the country to install him as President to deal with immensely urgent and complex issues such as IRAQ and the war on Terror. How on earth can anyone expect that he is up to that task when he cant even complete something so much smaller and easier?

For all the failures of the IRAQ campaign, and there are many, the reality here is that there still might be ultimate success, and it appears to be growing in likelihood by the day (though by no means is this certain). A free democratic muslim country in the middle of the most costly, volatile and dangerous part of the world would be well worth it all. And that doesnt even include the side yet significant benefits of having Libya expose the nefarious nuclear arms trade with rogue nations and dangerous fanatical terrorists, and IRAN admit their part in it, and Syria expel (at least publicly) terrorist groups in their country, and the global and absolute condemnation of terrorism period. Yes, I know, the end does not justify the means, and this is a dangerous precedent Bush has started, albeit under reasonable pretenses and with a UN mandate. But we have never ever been so close to something so good for that region and the world.

As much as I dislike Bush and the entire political system that we have (that gives us such horrible choices), I cannot never ever ever accept someone as spineless, rudderless, unprincipled, and clueless as Kerry. The man has spent FOUR terms in office and not sponsored ONE friggin bill. And now he wants to actually do some work ... as President?! During tumultuous times?! All he does is show up and vote and cut ribbons. The man has been campaigning for an entire year (forget the 4 terms as Senator), and yet still cannot explain what he stands for in any simple terms. In fact, it changes by the week, and by the polls. His own voting record shows he has flip flopped on issues multiple times. And he wants to usher the world out of possible chaos in the most volatile and hate filled region that has the most intractable problems??! Are you kidding me?

Kerry, if you would all pull your heads out of your asses, represents EVERYTHING that is ill in society. He is filthy rich and claims he cares about the problems of the common man. He gave what less than $1000 last year to charity, a fraction of a fraction of what he made. Sure, he cares. He has managed to win a seat in our Senate, 4 times, by stating what he would do as Senator for the people of Massachusetts. Yet, he did absolutely NOTHING. Not one bill, nothing, in FOUR terms (You have to know the politics of MA to know how this is even possible). He will say anything, do anything to get elected, the worst trait of all. His message has changed so many times Republicans have stopped tracking them. Even the notorious Anti-Bush liberal loving NYTimes ran an article this week about all of Kerry's changing positions, and they couldnt remember them all. What does he actually believe in? Throw a dart. Ask a monkey. You'll have just as good a chance as asking Kerry himself. Im sure when he wakes up every morning even he doesnt know. I wish I could just call him a liar, at least I would know where he stood.

It would be a tragedy if Kerry wins. With all that said, if Kerry does win the silver lining would be that it would hasten the arrival of change in our political system, which is so desperately needed.

By RPCVinLA (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade9c-41.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Saturday, June 05, 2004 - 5:31 pm: Edit Post

Ronald Reagan RIP

No matter what your beliefs, the impact he left on the world will live longer than most every other president of leader of the free world.


By --jim (cache-ntc-aa03.proxy.aol.com - on Wednesday, June 09, 2004 - 11:21 pm: Edit Post

Well, Reagan certainly leaves a legacy of hyperbole.

By ihatedthe80s (cpe-024-165-163-194.midsouth.rr.com - on Saturday, June 19, 2004 - 2:17 am: Edit Post

Seems that many who think Ronny was the greatest president are suffering from alzheimers as well...
South Africa
Bitburg Cemetery
...to name a few

A few lawmakers even want to replace FDR on the dime with the likeness of Reagan. What's next, Dubya on a box of Wheaties?

By RPCVinLA (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade10b-55.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Thursday, July 15, 2004 - 3:02 am: Edit Post

Another ridiculous post from another hating Democrat. Suddenly, Reagan is responsible for S. Africa's apartheid, homelessness in America and AIDS. Hitler might feel envious. FYI: its a proven fact that when Democrats are in the oval office that reports on homelessness drop dramatically though homelessness itself does not. Apparently, you believe everything the media tells you. You conveniently forgot that Carter's stewardship raised unemployment to European levels of 10%+ and Regan brought that down dramatically, reducing the homelessness and poverty that Carter added. AIDS started in Africa and there is no study anywhere that shows that had we thrown more money at it in the early years we would have known enough about it to stop its progress. Two decades on and we still cant stop it. I suppose you wont blame Clinton. FYI, far far more people die of cancer every year than AIDS. Its not even close. Blame who? Reagan, Bush?

When it comes to politics we are so off course. Its this type of stupid, polemic, opportunistic, crazed rhetoric that takes over our national debate. No doubt this debate is fueled in large part by an out-of-control profit-oriented media all too willing to divide us to sell more ads and an entrenched political system left unchanged and unchallenged for 140 years. And we help them out. Even here, where one would expect more reasoned, calm, nuanced and fact-oriented dialogue. Its repulsive to me. We are better than this.


By RPCVinLA (69-172-197-111.vnnyca.adelphia.net - on Thursday, July 29, 2004 - 8:38 pm: Edit Post

An Election Tie - Tie Goes To Bush

I just did my own analysis of how this election will play out in the electoral college the other day and my analysis came to the stunning conclusion that this race will finish with a tie, Bush 269 - Kerry 269. Stunning, but not surprising. This race is too close to call right now. But, what if?

In such a case, according the Constitution (and this does not need Court rulings because this is clearly laid out) we will not know who will be our next President until the new Congress is sworn in in January. That is because the newly sworn in House will vote on who will be our next President.

The vote is very simple: each State gets one vote. So, the Representatives from each state vote and the candidate with the most votes from each State gets the one vote from that State. The candidate with the most State votes wins the Presidency. Though this scenario may seem like the coming of a second great and torturous election crisis for the American people, the winner will actually be known as soon as the tie is known on Election Day. That is because Bush has a clear victory in case of a tie. Its not even close.

That doesnt mean the Dems wont cry foul a second time, but should this scenario play out, there is little room for a court drama.

The Vice President, however, is elected separately, in case of a tie. The newly sworn in Senate would vote for the VP in a straight up vote.

So, to sum up, Tie goes to Bush. But in a tie, I just dont think Cheney would survive a Senate vote, if the Dems take back the Senate. What I do not know however, is whether a tie in a Senate vote of the VP is still broken by the VP, which, one would suppose, would be Cheney. That would be something, Cheney voting himself back into office.

Any thoughts?

p.s. I reserve the right to alter my analysis in light of new evidence at any time

By John McAuliff (ool-44c28682.dyn.optonline.net - on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 5:08 pm: Edit Post

What is at stake for the Peace Corps and returned volunteers and staff in who is elected President?

Some of us have decided a great deal, as you can see by visiting

It is not hard to predict that most returned Peace Corps people would be more enthusiastic about John Kerry, in part because his and Teresa's life experience and world view are more like our own. And in part because George Bush and the neocons embedded in the Administration bespeak an insularity and arrogance totally antithetical to many of us.

Certainly the tone of the audience response to speakers at the NPCA conference in Chicago suggests there were not many Bush votes in the room.

NPCA, however, unlike the predecessor Committee of Returned Volunteers, has striven to maintain its non-partisan character. CRV had a big contingent in the Chicago convention demonstration of 1968. NPCA was not present in the half million person march against the GOP agenda in New York last Sunday. But then, CRV no longer exists, and NPCA is well established and increasingly influential.

If our alumni organization cannot do it, should returned Peace Corps volunteers and staff in some other collective fashion take a stand about who should be elected President? Do former Peace Corps folks because of their experience have something special to bring to a campaign that will be dominated by the question of how the US should conduct itself in the post 9/11 world? Will we be noticed and heard by the general public the way the opinion of military veterans is? Is there any risk that the partisanship of returned Peace Corps volunteers and staff will compromise the non-partisan character of, and bipartisan support for, the Peace Corps itself?

Some of us have decided that we agree with John Kerry when he says 'this is an election in which everything we care about is on the line'. Following the initiative of Massachusetts State Senator Dave Magnani, we are forming a network called Returned Peace Corps for Kerry Edwards. We seek to make the largest possible splash by gathering many thousand signatures on a to-be-made-public statement of support for John Kerry and John Edwards. Please consider joining us by visiting http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/RPC4KerryEdwards/

By OutOfYourMind (ca-stmnca-cuda1-blade10a-234.stmnca.adelphia.net - on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 10:31 pm: Edit Post

Yes, you are right, Teresa & John Kerry's life experiences are very much like ours. I say this as Im writing you from my chalet in Switzerland, on my way via private jet to my massive estate in Idaho. As we all continue to give to the world in the name of peace, like the Kerry's I gave hundreds of dollars this year to charity, lets reminisce about all the work we have done so far. Let me just tell my pilot that Im changing my mind, I want to go ride our horses in our mansion in PA. Reminiscing, I remind myself of all those years I spent in the Senate (20) and the one (1) bill that I co-sponsored during that time. Boy, that was a hard days work. I might be able to sponsor a bill on my own in the coming years! Its challenging coming up with legislation, one has to take a position, and I like to fight for all sides of every issue. Heck, its challenging enough showing up for votes. Got to keep some time open for snowboarding and yatching. Which reminds me, maybe I should get up to our estate in the Cape this weekend to take our yatch out. Yes, John and Teresa are just like us!

By John McAuliff ( on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 2:28 am: Edit Post

Our anonymous correspondent does have a real point buried inside his clever message. Obviously the wealth and lifestyle that came to John Kerry and Teresa Heinz as a result of marriage puts them in a different league than most of us.

However, let it be noted that John comes from a Foreign Service family and has lived in several countries. His Vietnam experience was as close to the grass roots as many of ours, and he learned more from it than some PCVs did from their's.

Teresa grew up in the Portuguese colony of Mozambique where her father was a doctor. She took part in the anti-apartheid movement as a student in South Africa.

From meeting both of them, and having indirect contact with John during my decades of work against the war and for peace time reconciliation , I think their internationalist world view and seriousness about equitable development are remarkably similar to those of many RPCVs.

When they speak about the Peace Corps and its potential, I believe there is unusual authenticity in their words.

Add a Message

This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.