Massachusetts Cop Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As an independent voter and with the presidential race starting to heat up, I am no closer in deciding who I want to vote for then I was 6 months ago.

This morning I went to johnkerry.com and read through the section titled, "Kerry Endorsed by International Brotherhood of Police Officers".

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0514.html

The information was great but I have lost my faith in the integrity of politicians (especially during election time). Also, with Kerry's history of flip-flopping his opinions/issues I was wondering what the members of this forum though regarding some of the issues Kerry mentioned on his website.

First, he states the following regarding GWB:

George Bush Has Turned His Back On Cops:

George Bush Guts Funding for Police Officers. The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program has helped fund more than 100,000 police officers and contributed to one of the largest declines in crime in our nation's history. Yet President Bush has sought to cut the COPS program in every one of his budgets. His current budget slashes the COPS program for 2005, providing only $97 million, a $646 million (87 percent) cut below the 2004 enacted level. Over the long term, his budget assumes the elimination of COPS hiring programs and technology and safe schools initiatives. [House Budget Committee Democratic Caucus, 2/19/04]

George Bush Says He Supports Extension of Assault Weapons Ban, But Fails to Move It. The White House says that on assault weapons, President Bush "supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law." Yet the White House has done nothing to move an extension. President Bush actually opposed efforts to include an extension of the assault weapons ban as part of a bill he strongly supported to protect gun manufacturers from liability. The Bush Administration said: "The Administration urges the Senate to pass a clean bill, in order to ensure enactment of the legislation this year. Any amendment that would delay enactment of the bill beyond this year is unacceptable." [Knight-Ridder, 4/12/03; Statement of Administrative Policy, 2/24/04; The Hill, 5/12/04]

Without Help From George Bush, War and State Budgets Have Forced Layoffs in Police Departments. While police departments have faced new burdens because of the war on terror, states and cities have had less money to address those burdens because of more than $200 billion in state deficits over the last three years. Without real help from President Bush, cities across America laid off cops. The situation has been made worse by the war on Iraq, which has "required the call-up of huge numbers of reserves, many of whom are cops." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/04; USA Today, 12/2/03; Washington Monthly, 9/03]

The Bush Administration Has Failed to Adequately Share Domestic Intelligence Information with Local Police Departments. The FBI and other intelligence agencies have been widely criticized for failing to share information with local police departments who police American cities. A GAO report found, "no level of government perceived the process as effective," and only 13 percent of federal officials and 35 percent of state officials believed that the current level of intelligence sharing between federal, state, and local officials was adequate and effective. "Despite repeated FBI assurances that cops are equal partners in the war against terrorism, local cops say they frequently feel like second-class citizens." [GAO, 8/27/03; Washington Monthly, 9/03]

Bush Proposed Cutting Overtime Pay for Cops. In both the original proposed overtime pay rules and the revised set of rules, the Bush Administration has threatened the overtime pay of thousands of police officers. Under the original Bush plan, "A police officer who walks a beat (manual work) may not lose overtime protection, but a police sergeant who spends significant time supervising two or three other officers will lose overtime protection." Revised rules did not clarify the problem. [Economic Policy Institute, 7/26/03, 5/4/04]

John Kerry Will Stand by America's Police Officers:

Support Police Officers in the Battles Against Crime and Terror. Police departments have faced historic burdens since 9/11, including added overtime work and needs for new training and new communications and safety equipment. While George Bush has failed to support these departments, John Kerry will provide $25 billion in immediate fiscal relief to states and communities-money that states and localities will be able to use to give the tools they need to keep our streets safe and protect against terror. In addition, John Kerry will continue the COPS program which he helped create.

Share Intelligence to Protect America Against Terror. John Kerry believes that appropriate state and local authorities should get access to the 58 national terrorist lists and intelligence officials should work to simplify these lists. In addition, a 24-hour operations center should be established in each state to provide a real time intergovernmental link between local and federal law enforcement. Field-level police would contact this center to determine whether to hold or release suspects based on a check of federal databases.

Continue the Assault Weapons Ban. John Kerry believes we can protect the right to bear arms and at the same time keep guns out of the hands of criminals. He stands with law enforcement officers, who put their lives on the line every day, in seeking to ensure that these officers are not outgunned by criminals armed with these weapons of war. John Kerry will renew the assault weapons ban, a measure President Bush claims to support, and will close the gun show loophole.

Support Neighborhood Prosecutor Programs. John Kerry will support police officers and reduce crime by bringing prosecutors into high-crime neighborhoods. Kerry's neighborhood prosecutor program will support states that assign prosecutors to specific communities where they work closely with police officers and residents to combat crimes like drug activity, noise violations, and vandalism. The prosecutors' offices will be located in the neighborhoods where they are assigned, and prosecutors will regularly attend community meetings to solicit input.


I am just looking for some clear insight regarding these statements made by Kerry. The bottom line, who is the better candidate for LE professionals?

Also, does anyone have any resources for Bush's views on LE?

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
the real life bottom line - people who think, vote republican. - kerry the fraud can make all kinds of promises, but his record reveals him to be a liberal, left wing, soft on crime sympathizer that would appoint fruitcakes to the Supreme Court - unions may endorse a candidate for a political favor, BUT we need to look at the big picture - democ rats are not our friends, they are the party that always screws us with flagmen, abolistion of stun guns, etc, etc, - history is history and facts are facts - democ rats are no true friends of police - DESPITE who any police union endorses.... Kerry is THE most LIBERAL jamoke in the U S Senate - he will screw us over if elected - do not be bamboozeled. my vote is for President Bush and all the Republican candidates -
remember in November - (R) = Right choice , (D) = Dumb choice . real men vote Republican
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,417 Posts
When it comes right down to it, either one could give a shit less about you. What you as a voter has to do is ask yourself, "who do I most identify with ideologically" and vote for that man. Neither Bush, nor Kerry is going to do anything to help the workingman, Cops included. I'm a conservative. A Pat Buchanan conservative. Not a W Neo-Con. Not that he’s a bad guy. For all of the 1 off problems I have with President Bush, he is the 1 thing between the f'ing scumbag, cowardly, terrorists and us. (I do wonder why he hasn’t unleashed the US military though. If he had, Mr. Paul M. Johnson Jr., Nick Berg, the Black Water contractors and all of the other innocents that were slaughtered by these pigs in turbans would still be alive OR the camp that killed those poor SOB’s would be a sea of glass right now.) (Kerry would still be sucking the UN’s a-hole.) But can anyone tell me why, when the rest of the free world hates us anyway, we haven’t unleashed holy hell on these primitive assholes? Who the hell are we trying to win over! The Iraqi’s have no real use for us. In fact, they resent us for LIBERATING THEM! The Saudis are on the brink of a calamity, and if Abdullah takes over when King Fahd drops dead, we are really fucked. He "spent time in the Sudan, Afghanistan and is a staunch ally of Iran" (Can you say Osama?) (newsmax.com) Think there wont be a REAL war for oil someday? Yeah, right. If Abdullah assumes control of Saudi Arabia someday (Soon too) the Iraqi war will seem like a training exercise.

But to get back to my problems with Kerry \ Bush et al, and us. Anyone out there have a dad, granddad, mom, nana, uncle, cousin, friend, shipmate, whatever in a VA hospital? Ever bean to a VA hospital lately? Would you put your fucking dog in a VA hospital?! Every administration since I have been alive has ignored the VA. Can someone tell me whom else we should be taking care of? Forget welfare, forget socialized medicine, and forget everything! A 17-year-old joins the army, puts in his 20+, ask for NOTHING at retirement, except a little discount at the PX, and some descent fuckin healthcare in thier old age. It’s a goddamn disgrace. I just attended the funeral of my WWII Silver Star, 2x Purple Heart uncle who languished in the Bedford MA VA. It turned my stomach to see him there. My 75 yo dad, a retired SCPO USN sub-mariner (24 years in) will never see the inside of that pig sty as long as I have anything to say about it.

Sorry about my :sb: I didn’t mean to digress, but what I was heading to was we are on our own, no matter who is in the Oval Office. But who best represents your principles? Who do you think will protect you and your family? Whose policies will best satisfy the needs of you and your family? For me it was Ronald Wilson Reagan and Pat B. George W. Bush is my only option in 2004. Kerry (the Internationalist and a Marxist) is not a choice. There is no argument there. If you appreciate your 2cd Amendment rights, your 38% tax bracket (some fuckin prize huh), the Commander in Chief deciding with his advisors when and with whom we go to war with, and how to protect our interests, then GWB (IMHO) is your only right choice. If you’ve read this post, I apologize for the passionate tangents. But if we don’t take care of out veterans, why should we take care of anybody? They’ve honestly earned it… ~Kozmo

BTW: if you love Bill Clinton, vote for Kerry. There is an excellent chance he will appoint that seditious, lying, narcissistic sociopath to the Supreme Court.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top