Tammy Bruce - Liberal, Democrat, pro-choice Feminist, Lesbian, former head of the California chapter of NOW - is voting for George W. Bush. Read it here: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/29/85246.shtml.
I suspect that a lot of Dems are going to jump the fence on Tuesday, polls be damned.
Who gives a shit? Tammy Bruce is not exactly a force on the left.
Newsmax is a right wing shit rag, btw. You might want to seek your news elsewhere.
She ain’t no liberal. I’ve heard her radio show; she went right-wing quite a while ago.
The guy who hangs out on the corner muttering to himself and drooling says he’s voting for GWB too. And for the same reasons! Small fuckin’ world, huh?
In short: women should vote for Bush, because if you don’t, terrorists will kill your children.
Her whole argument is based on the idea that Bush will be more effective in fighting against terrorism than Kerry. I can see how someone might believe that, as long as he has been in a coma for the last three years and has heard nothing but Republican talking points since he woke up. Those of us in the reality-based community, on the other hand, might take issue with it.
Tammy Bruce – faux progressive, DINO, bigot, right-wing shill, FOX News’ fave lesbian (except for Mary Cheney), Laura Schlessinger’s token gay pal-- is voting for George W. Bush.
Color me extraordinarily shocked.
Geeze, what’s next? Zell Miller jumping party lines?
I don’t know Tammy Bruce’s body of work well.
That said, there will be a good number of Democrats crossing party lines and voting for Bush this year. There are several members of my family, all Democrats, doing just that.
There will be far, far more people crossing over to vote against Bush.
To **Diogenes the Cynic ** (or whoever):
I usually make a hit ‘n’ run on Newsmax just to check for breaking stories.
My favorite news site is National Review Online (Yay, Buckley!) http://www.nationalreview.com/.
There are more columnists than I can keep up with at Townhall.com http://www.townhall.com/, but I do my best (I love Walter Williams).
For some real meat ‘n’ potatoes I visit The New Criterion http://www.newcriterion.com/.
And I am particularly fond of SteynOnline http://www.marksteyn.com/. Brilliant and funny as hell.
Still, I am always open to suggestions. If you can recommend a first-rate unbiased daily news site I will be happy to look at it. If you can recommend a left-wing news site with the same intellectual caliber as the National Review or The New Criterion, I would be more than happy to look at that, too. As you become better acquainted with me, you will find out that I make a real effort to find out what the other side thinks and believes - and why.
The ball is in your court, sir.
I still find it sad that I’m voting against Bush rather than* for * Kerry.
And there’s the problem. They’ll be voting against Bush, and not for Kerry.
There’s only one candidate generating any kind of excitement in this race, and that’s Bush. He generates strong feelings on both sides of the aisle, in a way that Kerry isn’t.
Few people are casting a vote for Bush to spite Kerry. Yet Kerry needs all of those anti-Bush votes. Without them, he loses in a landslide.
Your choice of words, Diogenes, illustrates the big problem Kerry has.
I really wouldn’t call it excitement.
I avoid left wing sites for the most part so I have none to recommend. For neutral stuff I perefer to read AP or Reuters. Other than that I tend to read mainstream sites like CNN, NYTimes or Washington Post. I am more likely to read right wing sites than left because I don’t need to have my own opinions validated and I prefer to see how the enemy is spinning the days stories. I am a daily Drudge reader, usually multiple times a day.
There is bias and there is bias, though. Fox News leans to the right but is essentially a news source. Newsmax is purely a propaganda outlet.
You know, I think that most femine hygine products and toilet papers would be offended at being compared to Newsmax, you really should pick better insults. 
If you do not feel any great enthusiasm or affection for John Kerry, is that because - deep down inside - you suspect that he is just a vacuous non-entity? In that case, why vote for him? Do you really want to witness the spectacle of a US President getting royally hosed by the French and the UN? After conceding our national honor to them?
All this anti-Bush hysteria is just plain irrational. Think of your country, man.
What does that say about Bush?
Bush has generated more genuine hate and resentment than any prez in my lifetime and that includes Nixon.
Excitement? I must have missed it. Have they shipped any to Minnesota?
OTOH, you should have felt the electricity in the packed theaters showing Fahrenheit 9/11.
Bush needs them more than Kerry does.
The fact that people are deserting the Bush camp in droves is a problem for Kerry? I’ll take that problem all day long.
To Diogenes the Cynic:
I have duly noted your suggestions, sir, and I thank you.
OK, THAT’s the dumbest thing I have heard for a long while now…
I’ve never felt any great enthusiasm or affection for any politician in my life except erhaps Paul Wellstone. If you’re voting based on affection, you’re voting for the wrong reason.
Oh yeah - by all means, let’s have four more years of chest-thumping as a replacement for foreign-policy. :rolleyes: