I'm not voting for Bush but lets keep things fair:
<< Gore has an interest in preserving our environment. >>
Sure, by having government buy all our land. And did you know the government is one of the worst polluters in the US? What's he done about that? His idea of excellence in environmental preservation is to increase taxation on fossil fuels. That sure has helped Americans a great deal recently.
<< Gore has an interest in keeping the taxation levels the same on the rich, and reducing the taxation levels on the poor. >>
Yet again the middle class, the most plentiful, gets to soak. Who's on our side?
<< Gore has an interest in allowing the economy to remain as it is, rather than "tinkering" with it. >>
The economy is its own animal. Even if he could affect it he wouldn't know how.
<< Gore has a better grasp on international politics--at least he knows what is going on in other countries. >>
No first term president is an expert at foreign policy. Gore has a built-in advantage but it wouldn't take the next president long to learn the ropes.
<< Gore's first important decision as a candidate was picking Joe Leiberman as his VP--one of the most honest men in Washington. >>
Bush picked Chenny, a man with a perfect record and who is regarded has having the highest integrity in Washington.
<< Gore has an extensive record as a public servant. >>
So does Bush.
<< Gore actually went to Viet Nam. >>
Gore was a journalist. He stayed away from the fighting. He had unofficial body guards (other soliders to keep in impromptu eye on him).
Anyway, the point is both rep. and dem. candidates are weak. IMO we'd be better served about someone who actually cared about the middle class and doing what's right. These guys ain't it and neither are their parties.
