10/06/2000

About the Candidates

After listening to mind-numbing soundbites from Gore and Bush Tuesday night, I'm looking for fresh opinions, something I can always count on from SNET readers. What do you think of this year's candidates for president and vice president? Who will you vote for and why? If you are undecided, what will make up your mind?

Here are a few letters I've already received to get OUR debate started. I hope this one keeps you awake!

***

Dear Beth,

I'm going to vote a straight Democratic ticket. This is rare for me, because I usually split my vote, depending upon the person running for office. I am not enamored of the choice. I think we have many other capable people in this great country without having to resort to either "dynasty," but George W. Bush is not an option.

As far as social issues go, the Republicans are bad news. Friends of mine who live in Florida say Jeb Bush has set that state back five decades. George W.'s record on education and prison reform in Texas is abysmal. I think Clinton is a flawed human being (who among us is not?), but he's a highly intelligent man who has moved this country forward. I hope Gore would continue the progress. I think alcohol abuse, extramarital affairs, mental illness, children's brushes with the law, and other private matters should remain private. But so long as readers and viewers eat up the "juicy news," that wish is unrealistic.

As a retired educator, I believe in public education, and think a system of vouchers is flawed. At the same time, we should take a long look at the outdated practice of granting tenure to teachers who have lost their enthusiasm for teaching and take another look at our unrealistic expectations of administrators, who are increasingly swamped with bureaucratic paperwork.

I also believe in death with dignity (legislated in Oregon, and soon, hopefully, in Maine), a woman's right to choose (with NO governmental interference) and the legalization of drugs (to curtail violence.)

***

Dear Beth,

For most of my life I was a registered Democrat; both my husband and I were politically active. But last year, in a feeling of utter disgust with the man in the White House, I switched my party affiliation and became a registered Republican.

Nevertheless, I was impressed with Senator Lieberman because he seemed down-to-earth -- a God-fearing man with strong religious convictions -- certainly someone to fight for the nobler causes. HAH!

It turns out that Joe Lieberman is a politician to the core and wears piety like a cloak that he can discard at will when it comes down to what is good for Joe Lieberman. A truly devout Jew respects life. Joe did nothing to ban the travesty that is partial birth abortion. Also, he is staying in the Senate race. Why? Doesn't he believe Al Gore can win? He is hedging his bets so that he can stay in Washington no matter which way the election goes. I have never been more disillusioned. Joe Lieberman is a hypocrite and regardless of how I feel about Al Gore, for that reason alone I could never support the Democratic ticket.

We have had a liar for a president the last eight years. I wouldn't want to see a vice president who has already proven himself a hypocrite. Now, if Barbara Bush would just run for president, we'd really have someone!

***

Dear Beth,

As a consumer advocate of more than 35 years, I met Joe Lieberman in the '80s when he was an attorney general for the state of Connecticut . At that time, I was writing an exposé for a CT newspaper about fraudulent companies. Joe came to my office with his executive aide to learn more about the fraud and to expose these con artists.

Joe Lieberman, in my opinion, has always been there for the "little guy" and believes that you can "fight city hall." Whenever I had a gripe about a fraudulent activity, I would write to Joe and he would write back. When he agreed there was fraud or violence and something should be done, he did it! He is a firm believer in truth and always fought for the consumer.

Joe will be an excellent vice president and will bring to that office honesty and thoroughness in getting the work done.

I disagree, however, with his decision to run for two offices at once, i.e. for vice president and U.S. Senator for Connecticut. I would like to see Atty. General Richard Blumenthal fill his Senate seat. When Representative Barbara Kennelly ran for governor against Rowland, she elected to give up her seat as a representative and not have a dual candidacy. She had the same situation as Joe Lieberman but was courageous enough to give up the seat.

***

Dear Beth,

I am extremely upset with Ralph Nader. I've known Nader since the 1960's when he wrote "Unsafe At Any Speed." There was a story that circulated in the 1960's that he would not accept a ride when he was stranded because he did not believe that the car was safe. Now there was a fighting national consumer advocate! His run for president is the most ridiculous idea I ever heard of.

Ralph Nader has diversified himself too much. We don't know what he stands for anymore. He is the former consumer advocate who is anti- everything.

We don't need him to run for president. We need him to be the consumer advocate he used to be way back in the 1960's. He was forceful, focused and for the people. We don't have a national consumer advocate. No one has taken his place. Ralph should return to his original work as a champion for the "little guy" and help cut the red tape for the consumer who is trying to solve a problem.

Shame on you, Ralph Nader, for deserting the consumer!

Note from Beth Bruno: So far, no one has written to me about Cheney's contributions to the Bush candidacy. Anyone care to comment?

Please send questions or comments to bbruno@snet.net.