I am getting fairly disillusioned with George W Bush.
Here are some of the reasons. These specific stories are just illustrative.
First, this story: http://www.herald-dispatch.com/2004/July/15/update.htm
We are not a police state, nobody is truly quashing dissent. But this sort of thing has become much too common. Creating “protest zones” is not cool. Neither is arresting protesters. It indicates an attitude that I believe is entirely incompatible with public service. You do not arrest people who show up at a presidential appearance wearing “Love America, Hate Bush” T-shirts. Even if you might technically be within your rights to arrest them. If you “fear for their safety” then you know what you do, policemen? You _protect_ them. This is America.
Second thing is http://in.news.yahoo.com/040806/137/2fdm8.html
You remember they raised the terror alert in NYC the other day and were criticized for it. Someone leaked that the reason they did so was that
they had arrested some guy named Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan who
was a computer whiz and sending and receiving encrypted messages for bin Laden. This was quickly followed by some massive arrests in England and
The guy had been arrested, but was A MOLE at the point that the official leaked his name. Due to the leak, law enforcement officials had to move more quickly than they wanted to and prematurely end the sting operations.
This tells me that at least some members of the Bush administration are either (1) morons, or (2) more concerned with being vindicated than with winning the
War on Terror.
I just checked Drudge, and now I have a third reason: http://cnn.allpolitics.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=CNN.com+-+International+team+to+monitor+presidential+election+-+Aug+8%2C+2004&expire=-1&urlID=11261137&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2004%2FALLPOLITICS%2F08%2F08%2Finternational.observers%2Findex.html&partnerID=2001
This makes me very mad. We are a sovereign nation, and international election monitors have no business here.
And I am disillusioned with Alan Keyes and Republicans in general:
If Keyes is going to criticize Hillary for moving to NY to run for the Senate, he should not move from Maryland to Illinois to run for the Senate. He said
just last week that “As a matter of principle, I don’t think it’s a good idea” to run for Senate in a state you aren’t from. Which means to me, he does not stick to his principles. I agree with his politics, and voted for him in the 2000 primary, but this bothers me a lot.
Keyes is right, Obama _must_ be challenged. But as Obama is from Illinois, he should be challenged by a conservative _from Illinois_.
I do not know to what extent these things matter to anyone else, but I’m not sure I still support Bush or will vote for him. I’d rather lose on principle.