sanitypages endorsement .. presidential election 2000

First a little presidential humor, with JibJab's cartoon CLICK HERE.

The political race for November is now finally starting to become somewhat interesting. If "interesting" means "boring as hell but there is no other news to speak of". Still, we hope in the coming weeks that you will start your personal research on the political candidates and pick a good candidate to endorse. To assist in your research, every election we provide the best links on the Internet for political issues, and also give you our opinion of the political landscape. CLICK HERE for our links page ..

Now following our long standing tradition dating back to 1996 (whew), we will give you our opinion.

First, for a quick historical glimpse, Sanitypages.com had this to say about the Presidential political landscape in 1996 (keeping the same cheesy thumb graphics):

	1996 Election: Candidate President Clinton An extremely intelligent individual that can clearly run the country, and knows the issues, but does not have the character to continue to be President. We trust him to run the country, but not to hang around our daughters. Is that the right choice for the job? Not really.
	1996 Election: Candidate Bob Dole Absolutely wonderful man that is too nice for his own good. Still, he comes up wrong on the issues, and does not have strong enough leadership qualities.
	1996 Election: Candidate Ross Perot The first time around, it was interesting to have a third party candidate that said something different. This time around, we know without question that this man is a certifiable wacko. Clear paranoia issues, and a mouth that just does not know when to shut the hell up.
	1996 Election: Candidate Harry Brown It is with some reluctance we give our endorsement to Harry Brown. The Libertarian platform is a good one that puts a streamlined economy over political hot-button issues. One of our favorite points includes paying off our national debt, which should be priority one for all the candidates. Still, the reluctance comes from the fact that we are somewhat concerned that he could become another Ross Perot. Still, there is no evidence of that, and failing a better choice, the nod goes to Harry and his female VP cohort.

Obviously the Sanitypages track record on endorsing a candidate hardly managed to put Harry Brown in the winners circle. In fact, we would be lucky if our endorsement got the man a single vote. However, it did make quite a few people take a look at the issues and the candidates closely, and that is all we can ask.

Now it is 2000, and we have some new faces and some old ones in the lineup for this election. We will be reviewing five candidates for the office of President of the United States:

Ralph Nadar, Green Party
Pat Buchanan, Reform Party
Harry Brown, Libertarian
George W. Bush, GOP (Republican)
Al Gore, Democrat

Skip Immediately To The Summary

Overall, it is a strong group of candidates, and much like the election in 1996, we also have one candidate that would be better suited for Bellevue Hospital than President. Still, these are our candidates, and here is our review:


Ralph Nadar, Green Party

Ralph has done an excellent job of putting the Green Party on the map for the first time. Nadar could secure as much as five percent of the vote, and perhaps help make the Green Party a viable candidate in the future. Or. Maybe not.

The truth is that the strong Liberal belief system is still alive, and we all would like to see the environment be better taken care of. But does that mean we want a President that would put the environment ahead of our economy and safety? We might say we do, but deep down we all think with our pocket books, and we will vote in favor of economy friendly policies.

Ralph has a good platform, and we encourage everyone to look it over. If you are strongly in favor of policies that will protect our environment, he is worth considering. However, we think we have all of the environmental friendliness we would need in Candidate Gore. For that reason, this was the wrong year for the Green Party to finally make a showing.

We like you Ralph. You are a bit strange, but we like you. We just will not vote for you when there is a more attractive environmental freak running for office.

Pat Buchanan, Reform Party

The man is a bigot. He is also a loudmouth. We can not imagine what would happen if he had to meet with a leader from another country that was a black homosexual. No doubt it would be an embarrassment for the history books. His own party is embarrassed by his rhetoric.

Please, do not vote for this man.


Harry Brown, Libertarian

Welcome back, Harry. This time you have joined us with a slick new male running mate. We have to tell you, we liked her better, and it is reflected in the poll results.

Four years ago Harry Brown put the Libertarian Party on the map much like the Green Party is doing today. In fact, his support from the Internet community (including Sanitypages.com) was astounding. Many polls taken on the Internet had him as the WINNER of the election. Clearly the party platform of complete freedom of government and taking care of our finances was something the was music to the ears of web surfers everywhere.

This time around, the music is a little old. We like the platform, but we were ready for a new face from the Libertarian Party. Remember what happened to Ross Perot the second time around? The same thing is happening to Harry, and he is pulling in less than one percent of the vote this time rather than a high of five percent in 1996.

It is all-together unfortunate, because the party platform is a breath of fresh air. With all of the talk Republicans give about reducing government, they are just as responsible for our large government as the Democrats. The Libertarian party delivers real platform stances that would reduce government spending dramatically, and give us all much more freedom. In fact, their platform is to reduce the size of government by double digits, which is quite a departure from the two major candidates that have never left office with a reduced government.

With all of the positives, we do not feel that Harry Brown has what it takes to secure more than one or two percent of the vote. As a result, he will be unable to make a difference in future elections either, and will actually hurt the Libertarian Party. Therefore, this time around we give him the big thumbs down. Sorry, Harry.


George W. Bush, GOP (Republican)

In so many ways, George W. Bush represents the opposite of President Clinton. This has come as a refreshing change to most Americans (hence his strong poll numbers.) Here is a man that clearly has the character and common sense to be our President. He knows how to get himself out of situations that expose his faults, and he looks and acts like a man that can set the character example for a country.

Clearly Candidate Bush has the family values and virtue to be a character example. Of course, that is the smallest part of the job. We know the tired cliché: "it's the economy stupid." Unfortunately for him, it is. Ninety nine percent of the job is making certain American's are happy with the way things are going, and one percent is looking good while doing it. That is why we tolerated a man like President Clinton for eight years.

How does Bush stand up on the economy issues? Unfortunately, he has borrowed many of the economic belief systems of his Republican predecessors. Can you say "Voodoo Economics"? His stance is that we will keep this economy going by giving the money back to the people including some substantial tax cuts. At the same time, he does not want to give a cent toward reducing the National Debt. Can you imagine what would happen if you never paid a penny toward your credit card bills? For a while, you would have a few more dollars and things would look good, but down the road the decision would bite you in the ass. And that is exactly what would happen to all of us under the George W. Bush plan.. For a few years, we would live in the shadow of eight great economy years, and then eventually the money would run out and we would be left paying more interest than we know how to pay for.

In addition to ignoring the National Debt, Candidate Bush would also like to get rid of the Estate Tax. Why? Because he supports the richest Americans getting richer, and that includes Estate tax cuts and Capital Gains tax cuts. If you do the research, you will find that unless you are in the top two percent of rich Americans, you are unlikely to benefit.

Candidate Bush is also less than brilliant on other issues, including the National Defense. Can you believe this man is in support of Star Wars (SDI), and wants to cancel the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty? These two issues alone are not only huge money wasters and dangerous to our safety, they are also incredibly stupid. These have the potential of causing tremendous damage to our relationships with other countries, not to mention wasting tens of billions of dollars on something that takes us backwards in the Nuclear Arms Race.

While Bush does support many of the same things for improving the environment that the other candidates do, he falls short on one major point. He does not support the Kyoto Global Warming Agreement. Obviously this is a choice in favor of business, avoiding the restrictive rules that this agreement would cause. None the less, during a time of great financial wealth for these businesses, now is the time to clean up our act.

The final issue we disagree with is Bush's stance on abortion rights. While his opposition to late-term abortions is a reasonable restriction, his opposition to any abortion that is outside of rape or life-threatening is a scary prospect to women across the country.

Still, we could consider forgiving all of these short fallings if it were not for the fact that George W. Bush is the polar opposite of Clinton in this regard: Bush is not smart enough to be President. We do not make this claim lightly. George W. Bush is a nice guy, and certainly has a brain when it comes to common sense. But when push comes to shove on deducing problems, or knowing who is the leader of which country, or knowing the history of our country, he falls down time and again. Countless interviews with the man asking questions that he simply did not know the answer to. Questions that his chief rival was able to answer quickly.

Therefore, it is due to the fact that George W. Bush is not smart enough to be President that we are forced to not give him our endorsement.


Al Gore, Democrat

Al has some major problems. He is not an appealing man to listen to. Or watch. Or be around. Lets face it, a sheet of drywall would have more movement at the podium, and be far more interesting to listen to.

But the real problems stem from the fact that he has been working for Clinton the past eight years. Sure, one might think being VP of arguably the best economy ever would be a good thing. But no. He has been the VP of the scandal White House. Whether it be moistened cigars or picking up dirty checks in the holy houses, this man has been exposed to more nasty scandals than any VP before him.

The bright side is that Al has easily been one of the best people to hold that office in the history of the United States. He has done more and seen more press and limelight than any VP before, and it is because he knows what he is doing. Even if he is so god-awful boring when he does it.

On the issues, Al comes out center, which is where he needs to be to be elected. He obviously has been taking pages out of the Clinton election brochure. He favors minor tax credits to give a little money back to the people, while at the same time giving some money toward reducing the National Debt. Our feeling is he does not give enough to the debt, but at least he is paying the interest, which is better than his chief rival.

On the environment Al is considered a champion. If he was not given the ticket on the Democratic party stub, he certainly could have secured Ralph Nadar's place. And when the economy is good, spending a few dollars to secure the environment for our children is something we should support.

His stance on the National Defense is better than his chief rival, as well. He supports raises for our citizens in uniform, and supports continuing the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. In a world with too many nuclear missiles already, this is a strong choice. And, Gore will save American's money by not starting up the Star Wars (SDI) project again. Maybe we will have something from So-so Security when we retire.

Clearly Gore is in favor of abortion rights under all circumstances, which we agree with. However, where Gore falls down a bit is his support of quota based hiring practices, which most Americans feel is a thing of the past.

How does Gore rate as a role-model? Not as well as Bush, just from the fact he stood by Clinton during the past eight years. But, if we ignore the antics of his boss, Gore is a fine role-model. Just a damn boring one.

Gore has another major thing going for him, and that is his ability to follow Clinton's play-book for getting elected. So far it has been perfect.. He places himself in the middle on all issues. He remains behind the curtain until the DNC throws their big party. Then, out of nowhere, announces a great running mate (Lieberman), and charges ahead in the polls.

If Bush agrees to a debate, Gore could easily tear Bush to shreds. Bush simply does not have the intelligence to go to verbal war with Gore. Gore may be boring, but he is far more intelligent than the guy from Texas.

So, with the I.Q. factor clearly leaning toward the Gore camp ("and the economy, stupid"), we make our endorsement in favor of the current Vice President.



The Picks For November 2000:

	2000 Election: Candidate Ralph Nadar While we like the idea of securing our environment for our children, most American's will not endorse the idea unless it also secures our wallets. Unfortunately for Ralph there is a candidate in the running that wants to do both, and that should keep the Green Party from getting any more than three percent of the vote in the end.
	2000 Election: Candidate Pat Buchanan We ask: Do we need to have a certifiable lunatic run for office every year? This time Pat took over Ross Perot's place. If you like the Bigot Ticket, this is the man to vote for.
	2000 Election: Candidate Harry Brown We liked you in 1996, Harry, but in 2000 you should have let your success breed a new face in the President seat rather than the Vice President. While the platform is one we like, we want to support a candidate that will make a difference. You had your chance last time.
	2000 Election: Candidate George W. Bush Great moral character, and generally a nice guy. Unfortunately, he does not have the intelligence to be President. This can be seen not only in his many pie-in-the-face interviews, but in his stance on some major issues. We recommend some more education, and then try again.
	2000 Election: Candidate Al Gore Gore may be about the most boring man to ever walk the face of the Earth, but he is also the most intelligent man in the running. His stance on the issues is right down the middle, like most Americans, and his moral character is considerably more acceptable than his boss. While we may fall asleep for the first four years, at least we know the country will be run well until the next election. Maybe then Powell will run. We can dream, can't we?