North Korea Would Vote For John Kerry

[Captain Ochre]

I heard something about this on the news, so I decided to check it out:

The regime in Pyongyang, analysts say, is rooting for virtually anyone other than George W. Bush to be the next U.S. president. That's why many observers are expecting little progress at the six-party talks aimed at halting North Korea's nuclear program that started yesterday in Beijing.

"North Korea is waiting for its own regime change — in D.C.," said Pang Zhongying, professor of international relations at China's Nankai University.

In return for shutting down its weapons program, the North wants to get the most generous possible trade terms, aid and security guarantees. Pyongyang is betting that by stalling, it can achieve a better deal with a new administration, analysts say. Nor does it want to grace President Bush with a diplomatic victory that might help re-elect him.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...koreans26.html

North Korea's state-controlled media are well known for reverential reporting about Kim Jong-il, the country's dictatorial leader.

But the Dear Leader is not the only one getting deferential treatment from the communist state's propaganda machine: John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic candidate, is also getting good play in Pyongyang.

In the past few weeks, speeches by the Massachusetts senator have been broadcast on Radio Pyongyang and reported in glowing terms by the Korea Central News Agency (KCNA), the official mouthpiece of Mr Kim's communist regime.

The apparent enthusiasm for Mr Kerry may reflect little more than a "better the devil you don't know" mentality among the North Korean apparatchiks. Rather than dealing with President George W. Bush and hawkish officials in his administration, Pyongyang seems to hope victory for the Democratic candidate on November 2 would lead to a softening in US policy towards the country's nuclear weapons programme.

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentSe...=1012571727088

[Epoetker]

Why not just have the next Bush campaign ad ask: 'Which Presidental candidate do our enemies endorse?"

(Iran's controllers are also pro-Kerry.)

[NoeticPenguin]

• Edited by a Moderator •

Moderated By: DDW

Come on!!!!! Let's keep it on this side of decency please.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[Captain Ochre]

*edited by a moderator*

I'm wondering when exactly we made the jump to calling N. Korea and Iran "civilized nations" ...

[Blemonds]

N. Korea remembers the windfall of nuclear support they received from the last Democrat to hold the office of U.S. President. It's no wonder they're pulling for Kerry. They'll probably pump campaign contributions into his camp the way the Chinese did for Clinton.

[SteveF]

I'm suprised Iran aren't offering helpful hints and tips to the Bush administration on how to set up a theocracy. Then again he seems to be doing a pretty good job without their help.

[Captain Ochre]

I'm suprised Iran aren't offering helpful hints and tips to the Bush administration on how to set up a theocracy. Then again he seems to be doing a pretty good job without their help.

Drifting a bit off-topic, aren't we?
You can argue (preposterously, imo) that the Bush Administration is setting up a theocracy in the US, but to suggest that Iran would offer pointers to Bush after Bush was instrumental in ousting a theocratic government in Afghanistan and is currently encouraging the unrest in Iran with a view toward toppling the theocratic government there is, well, utterly ridiculous.

More likely, you're just giving us your knee-jerk counterattack since the news report regarding Kerry paints him in a somewhat unfavorable light.
Is that what you're doing, eh?

[SteveF]

Drifting a bit off-topic, aren't we?

Apparently so.

You can argue (preposterously, imo) that the Bush Administration is setting up a theocracy in the US, but to suggest that Iran would offer pointers to Bush after Bush was instrumental in ousting a theocratic government in Afghanistan and is currently encouraging the unrest in Iran with a view toward toppling the theocratic government there is, well, utterly ridiculous.

Firstly, r.e. Iran I was just being a little playful. Secondly r.e. theocracy, i was exagerating a little. I do worry about the degree to which he panders to the fundamentalist Christian right though.

More likely, you're just giving us your knee-jerk counterattack since the news report regarding Kerry paints him in a somewhat unfavorable light.
Is that what you're doing, eh?

Nah, it wasn't a knee jerk, I'm just a bit bored. I like to think of myself as being pretty balanced politically. I doubt very much whether Kerry is an ideal candidate and there will be many stories (some false, some true) that will paint him in an unfavourable light. However, I would rather him in power than the current chimp.

[Socrates]

Firstly, r.e. Iran I was just being a little playful. Secondly r.e. theocracy, i was exagerating a little. I do worry about the degree to which he panders to the fundamentalist Christian right though.

You'd prefer Dean who panders to the fundamentalist atheist left?

[SteveF]

You'd prefer Dean who panders to the fundamentalist atheist left?

No, wouldn't prefer Dean. I didn't before the democrat elections and I certainly didn't after he appeared to go insane following the Iowa (?) primary.

To be honest none of the candidates really appeals to me, but I'd vote (if I were American!) for Kerry as he seems like the best of a bad bunch. Its a shame that is the way of things.

My ideal candidate would be left of centre (but not too far) and commited to separation of church and state. He could be an atheist or a theist, I wouldn't really care.

[AtheistArchon]

You'd prefer Dean who panders to the fundamentalist atheist left?

- Dean panders to the fundamentalist atheist left? I don't remember hearing anything about that.

- I DO remember Kerry giving a good speech on separation of church and state a couple of months ago, however... maybe he's the panderer, since he's not of a mind to institute Christian dogma as policy as opposed to Bush of course, who panders to the fundamentalist Christian right. And he isn't even apologetic about it!

- Anyway, I'm not terribly surprised if I heard any nation in the world, friend or foe, tell us they'd vote for Kerry. Bush doesn't have the lightest touch, diplomatically speaking. Even native English speakers are prone to misunderstandimate him every five or six words.

[Blemonds]

- Bush of course, who panders to the fundamentalist Christian right. And he isn't even apologetic about it!

What is there to apologize for?

Bush doesn't have the lightest touch, diplomatically speaking. Even native English speakers are prone to misunderstandimate him every five or six words.

Here's a link for you if your vocabulary may be lacking. I do this and I have no problem understanding Bush

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/mwwod.pl

[SteveF]

What is there to apologize for?

Well the fact that in pandering to this fundamentalist minority he is riding over the fine traditions of a great country. Tolerance, church-state separation etc etc. Its quite simply wrong.

Here's a link for you if your vocabulary may be lacking. I do this and I have no problem understanding Bush

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/mwwod.pl

Hows about this link:

http://www.dubyaspeak.com/

A quick perusal of the above should demonstrate that the chimp incumbent can barely string a coherent sentence together. Yet he is in charge on the most powerful country in the world. Does this not worry you slightly?

[Captain Ochre]

Well the fact that in pandering to this fundamentalist minority he is riding over the fine traditions of a great country. Tolerance, church-state separation etc etc. Its quite simply wrong.


Hows about this link:

http://www.dubyaspeak.com/

A quick perusal of the above should demonstrate that the chimp incumbent can barely string a coherent sentence together. Yet he is in charge on the most powerful country in the world. Does this not worry you slightly?

'Cause public speaking is such a key to leadership?
It worries me more that we place such a premium on image in our leaders rather than on character and agenda.

It'd be nice if Bush was half the orator that Tony Blair happens to be, imo. The types of things that I expect from Kerry (higher taxes, more expansive government programs, accelerated government involvement in health care) worry me a whole lot more than verbal gaffes from Bush.

[AtheistArchon]

The types of things that I expect from Kerry (higher taxes, more expansive government programs, accelerated government involvement in health care) worry me a whole lot more than verbal gaffes from Bush.

- Interesting you say that. Bush hasn't exactly reduced the size and cost of our government during his term. And taxes... Bush's cuts are anything but an unparalleled success. Health care? Bush is in bed with big corporations, namely the drug companies.

- I read an editorial a while ago... no link, sorry, I forgot completely where I found it... that was talking about the differences between traditional conservativism and neo-conservativism. Did you know Pat Buchannan is a vocal critic of Bush? The reason is because Bush hasn't done much that lies in the vein of what traditional conservatives stand for: small government, fiscal responsibility, less spending, and so on.

- Personally, my primary interests lie elswhere; I try to bend and flex with whatever financial hazards come my way by saving and being prepared. I'm more interested in church/state and intellectual integrity than the "everyday" political issues.