[typoon]

The following open letter was signed by 24 Olympians and professional athletes who have endorsed George Bush for President.

To our fellow Americans:

We have given much thought to the values and characteristics that make a great athlete. Our lives have been spent trying to run farther, push further, and jump higher than the person beside us, or across the field of our chosen sport.

With years of training and exhaustive competition beneath our belts, we have identified the values necessary to compete and win--values like personal strength, determination, a sense of fair play and faith.

The same qualities that make a great athlete make a great President - he determination to do what is right, regardless of the latest polls, the personal strength to bear the weight of the nation on your shoulders, and the faith that a higher power will direct the actions of good people.

We see in President Bush these same qualities.

In 2001, our nation was attacked without cause or provocation. The President's values saw us through those dark days after the terrorist attack.

The economy was rocked by the dual blows of the terrorists' cowardly action and the reckless disregard of the rules by a few rogue executives. But President Bush's decisive, principled leadership has moved America forward, and today our nation is safer and our economy is strong and getting stronger.

The fight against terrorism takes decisiveness. It takes continued support for our troops and first responders. But most importantly, it takes courage and inspirational leadership in the White House. In these critical times, our President has had the courage to stand up and do what's right.

For that and for his unwavering character, we choose George W. Bush as our President for the next four years. He is a leader we can depend on to make the tough decisions and the right decisions. Please join us in supporting a candidate of courage, President Bush--a leader who backs our troops defending our nation and shares our values.

Sincerely,

[itai195]

Well there you have it -- you can either side with 24 folks who throw balls and run in circles for a living, or with 48 folks who won those stupid Nobel prize things. That might be as insightful a way of summing up this election as any

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by itai195:
Well there you have it -- you can either side with 24 folks who throw balls and run in circles for a living, or with 48 folks who won those stupid Nobel prize things. That might be as insightful a way of summing up this election as any

Yep. Two groups that nothing about what real life is all about.

[OldManMac]

I've changed my mind, I'll tell ya!

[Twilly Spree]

Good to see our athletes are supporting the President.

[OldManMac]

So that's what an athletic supporter is!

I slay me!

[Mrjinglesusa]

WHO CARES. Seriously. I don't care if GOD endorsed Bush, it wouldn't make me vote for him.

[boots]

So, If I vote for Bush, I can make millions of dollars playing sports? Cool! Sign me up!

Or...

So, If I vote for Kerry, I'll make some important scientific discovery that benefits humankind? Cool! Sign me up!




How does this matter? I'm supposed to join the herd so I can "be like Mike?"

Sheep have a better grasp on reality.

[itai195]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Yep. Two groups that nothing about what real life is all about.

touche

In response to folks who criticize these endorsements, I agree with you. But a lot of lazy voters just go along with whoever their favorite interest group endorses. I had a big argument with someone the other day who votes with the CA PTA on every issue.

[boots]

Originally posted by itai195:
But a lot of lazy voters just go along with whoever their favorite interest group endorses. I had a big argument with someone the other day who votes with the CA PTA on every issue.

I guess it's easier than actually thinking about, like, issues...and stuff. I mean, it just takes so much time to figure out what I want, and what the, uh, candidates want...who has time for that stuff. Oh, hey, are we still on for the HALO lan-party tonight?

[itai195]

Originally posted by boots:
I guess it's easier than actually thinking about, like, issues...and stuff. I mean, it just takes so much time to figure out what I want, and what the, uh, candidates want...who has time for that stuff. Oh, hey, are we still on for the HALO lan-party tonight?

Sometimes I can't blame them! The CA Voter Information Guide this year is 185 pages long. But I'd rather they just didn't vote on issues they weren't informed about.

[thunderous_funker]

Why is it that when Democrat celebrities weigh into the political arena they are shouted down as idiots, amatuers or worse, but GOP celebrities do it their opinions are somehow a ringing endorsement for the general population to give heed to?

Why the hell should Bernie Kosar's opinion on who should be president be any more valid than any slob in America?

And will Matt Hasselbeck or Mary Lou Retton get death threats like Travolta and Penn when they threw their opinions about Bush around?

[BlueSky]

Republicans Endorsing John Kerry

Charley Reese, conservative columnist/journalist, Orlando Sentinel (1971-2001) -- May 17
Lee Iacocca, former Chrysler Chairman -- June 25
Russell E. Train, EPA chief under Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford -- Jul. '04
Various Republican Business Leaders -- Aug. 5
Gail Slocum, former Republican Mayor of Menlo Park, California -- Sept. '04
Clay Myers, Republican Secretary of State (1967-77) and State Treasurer (1977-84) for Oregon -- Sept. 1
Bill Rutherford, former Treasurer of Oregon and Chair of the Oregon Investment Council -- Sept. 1
George Comstock, Mayor of Portola Valley, California -- Sept. 1
Mike Cobb, former Republican Mayor of Palo Alto, California -- Sept. 8
Pete McCloskey (editorial here), former Republican Representative from California -- Sept. 8
John Eisenhower, son of former Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower -- Sept. 9
Jon Silver, former Republican Mayor of Portola Valley, California -- Sept. 24
John A. Galbraith, former Republican Ohio General Assemblyman -- Sept. 28
David Catania, Republican (now Independent) Councilman from Washington, D.C. -- Sept. 29
Clyde Prestowitz, counselor to Ronald Reagan's Secretary of Commerce -- Oct. 6
Rick Russman, former Republican State Senator from New Hampshire -- Oct. 7
Marshall Wittmann, former communications director and advisor to Arizona Republican Senator John McCain -- Oct. 7
Elmer L. Andersen, former Republican Governor of Minnesota (1961-63) -- Oct. 13
Ballard Morton, son of Thurston Morton, former Republican Senator from Kentucky -- Oct. 14
Anne Morton Kimberly, widow of Roger C.B. Morton, former Republican Representative from Maryland -- Oct. 14
William Milliken, former Republican Governor of Michigan (1969-82) -- Oct. 18
Marlow Cook, former Republican Senator from Kentucky (1968-74) -- Oct. 20
Peter Gillette, former Republican Commissioner of Trade & Economic Development for Minnesota (1991-95) -- Oct. 20

Republicans Who Will Not Vote For George W. Bush

Paul Findley, former Republican Representative from Illinois -- Apr. '04
A. Linwood Holton former Republican Governor of Virginia (1970-74) -- Aug. 29
Richie Robb, mayor of South Charleston, WV (and 2004 WV Republican elector) -- Sep. '04
William Saletan, "liberal Republican" columnist for Slate -- Sept. 1
Andrew Sullivan, conservative columnist, former editor of The New Republic -- Jul. 25
Log Cabin Republicans -- Sept. 8
Lincoln Chafee, Republican Senator from Rhode Island -- Oct. 4
Robert L. Black, retired Republican judge of the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court and the Ohio First District Court of Appeals -- Oct. 13
Bob Barr, former Republican Representative from Georgia (1995-2003) -- Oct. 14


Linkoid

[Joshua]

Pretty pointless.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally posted by Joshua:
Pretty pointless.

I disagree. Click the link in the above post and look at how many Republicans, Economists, Military leaders, Ambassadors, Nobel laureates, scientists, etc. are backing Kerry. That means A LOT more than a bunch of overpaid crybabies who play sports for a living. Even Bob Barr (R, GA), one of the leaders of the Clinton impeachment is not voting for Bush. Now THAT is saying something.

[olePigeon]

Now we know which professional athletes hate gays.

[mo]

This is really useful, actually, because I was kind of sitting on the fence, waiting to see which way Kerri Strug decided to vote.

[itai195]

I can see it now, the Bush campaign's new slogan: Kerry, weak on sports, wrong for America

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Now we know which professional athletes hate gays.

Even the ones who signed it who are gay? Are you trying to say that a gay who votes for Bush hates gays? You including Simey in that?

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Even the ones who signed it who are gay? Are you trying to say that a gay who votes for Bush hates gays? You including Simey in that?

I don't know if they hate gays, but they would be throwing their support behind someone who would like to ammend the constitution to discriminate against gays.

Simey, and others, seem to have rationalized that support by saying that Bush won't be able to ammend the constitution, that its just an election year gimmick they can't actually make happen, so it is safe to support Bush despite disagreeing with that plank of the platform.

I think that ignores just how sincere Bush seems to be in his position. I believe Bush sincerely and honestly believes that it would be worthwhile to ammend the constitution to prevent the natural progression of rights of gays towards equal status under the law. Whether or not he can actually do it does not diminish, IMO, his earnest desire to make the constitution and our society conform to his distorted, religiously brain-addled worldview.

I could never vote for a man who, free of the checks and balances of our remarkable system, would attempt to forge society to comply with his own religious convictions. I consider that to be a very dangerous personality trait.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
I don't know if they hate gays, but they would be throwing their support behind someone who would like to ammend the constitution to discriminate against gays.

Simey, and others, seem to have rationalized that support by saying that Bush won't be able to ammend the constitution, that its just an election year gimmick they can't actually make happen, so it is safe to support Bush despite disagreeing with that plank of the platform.

I think that ignores just how sincere Bush seems to be in his position. I believe Bush sincerely and honestly believes that it would be worthwhile to ammend the constitution to prevent the natural progression of rights of gays towards equal status under the law. Whether or not he can actually do it does not diminish, IMO, his earnest desire to make the constitution and our society conform to his distorted, religiously brain-addled worldview.

I could never vote for a man who, free of the checks and balances of our remarkable system, would attempt to forge society to comply with his own religious convictions. I consider that to be a very dangerous personality trait.

Bush believes it's a "choice" if a person is gay, Kerry believes that a person is born gay. How much worse is it for Kerry to oppose gay marriage (and he does), considering he feels that it's not a choice?

Kerry: "I know you guys can't help it, but I don't want you to be able to marry either."

In this instance, does he sound like the more rational and compassionate of the two?

[icruise]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Bush believes it's a "choice" if a person is gay, Kerry believes that a person is born gay. How much worse is it for Kerry to oppose gay marriage (and he does), considering he feels that it's not a choice?

Kerry: "I know you guys can't help it, but I don't want you to be able to marry either."

In this instance, does he sound like the more rational and compassionate of the two?

I don't really think it matters that much what they think. What matters is what they are going to do. Bush is in favor of a constitutional amendment limiting the rights of a portion of the population. Kerry is in favor of civil unions that have the advantages of marriage but aren't called marriage (I personally don't think this playing with language is important, but if it takes calling them "civil unions" to get people to accept them, then so be it).

Why don't you try asking a gay person which one is being more rational and compassionate?

[boots]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Bush believes it's a "choice" if a person is gay, Kerry believes that a person is born gay. How much worse is it for Kerry to oppose gay marriage (and he does), considering he feels that it's not a choice?

Kerry: "I know you guys can't help it, but I don't want you to be able to marry either."

In this instance, does he sound like the more rational and compassionate of the two?

Depends on what you think "marriage" is or should be. I think, based on his statements, that he thinks marriage is a religious term that should be controlled by the church. The state should keep to unions...or whatever you want to call it. So that separates and preserves the religious aspects of "marriage." Personally, I think it's a cop out. But then again, I'm not running for office.

[warmspit]

so, now repukes think celebrity endorsements is a GOOD idea? what happened to the "eveil hollywood" crap and how horrible actors are who suport dems?

h.y.p.o.c.r.ites

[chris v]

Okay, librul musicians who speak out politically should "shut up and play music," but when conservative athletes speak out, we should all listen to what they have to say, because they are important voices in the community.

Got it.

[itai195]

As long as we're on the topic of endorsements, don't forget George W. Bush's second cousins. Bush Relatives for Kerry. Has to be one of the most preposterous things I've seen in this election.

[deedar]

Originally posted by itai195:
Well there you have it -- you can either side with 24 folks who throw balls and run in circles for a living, or with 48 folks who won those stupid Nobel prize things. That might be as insightful a way of summing up this election as any

Good, very good. I was thinking this very thing.

[boots]

Originally posted by itai195:
As long as we're on the topic of endorsements, don't forget George W. Bush's second cousins. Bush Relatives for Kerry. Has to be one of the most preposterous things I've seen in this election.

I still think Zell Miller's confrontation with Chris Mathews is the most preposterous thing I've seen. And the funniest is John McCain suggesting that maybe Kerry shot Miller's Dog.

[ironknee]

Originally posted by itai195:
As long as we're on the topic of endorsements, don't forget George W. Bush's second cousins. Bush Relatives for Kerry. Has to be one of the most preposterous things I've seen in this election.

wow that's cool

[itai195]

Originally posted by boots:
I still think Zell Miller's confrontation with Chris Mathews is the most preposterous thing I've seen. And the funniest is John McCain suggesting that maybe Kerry shot Miller's Dog.

That was pretty funny. Thank God at least the Daily Show has injected some humor into this election.

[Mithras]

Originally posted by Mrjinglesusa:
WHO CARES. Seriously. I don't care if GOD endorsed Bush, it wouldn't make me vote for him.

That would give me pause, actually.

[Mithras]

Professional athletes are perhaps the only people less qualified than Hollywood stars to give informed comment on foreign and domestic policy.

MacNStein & itai, I agree that Nobel prize-winning scientists don't know that much more about what's best for the country. However, they may have insight into what's best for science. And helping science tends to help America in the long run. More than helping Hollywood or professional sports does, anway.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Bush believes it's a "choice" if a person is gay, Kerry believes that a person is born gay. How much worse is it for Kerry to oppose gay marriage (and he does), considering he feels that it's not a choice?

Kerry: "I know you guys can't help it, but I don't want you to be able to marry either."

In this instance, does he sound like the more rational and compassionate of the two?

Kerry does support civil unions, and giving spousal benefits. Bush supports neither; he hates gays.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally posted by Mithras:
Professional athletes are perhaps the only people less qualified than Hollywood stars to give informed comment on foreign and domestic policy.

MacNStein & itai, I agree that Nobel prize-winning scientists don't know that much more about what's best for the country. However, they may have insight into what's best for science. And helping science tends to help America in the long run. More than helping Hollywood or professional sports does, anway.

Good post and that was my point. Professional athletes are crybabies who get paid WAY too much for what they do. Their opinion on the presidential race means less than nothing.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by KarlG:
Kerry does support civil unions, and giving spousal benefits. Bush supports neither; he hates gays.

I've not seen where Bush says he's against civil unions, got some proof?

[icruise]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
I've not seen where Bush says he's against civil unions, got some proof?

I think he's officially left it open, but he's certainly not for them.

[Toutgood]

Those hard working stiffs probably loved those tax cuts. I can really relates to those guys.

And no, nobody's deciding for me. Be that actors, athletes, musicians, scientists, Jehova's Witnesses..nobody.

But it's nice to see they care...

[Mithras]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
I've not seen where Bush says he's against civil unions, got some proof?

He states it's "up to the states", but he supports the Musgrave Amendment, which reads:

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.

Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

Due to the "legal incidents thereof" language, many scholars (including the authors) believe it would prohibit civil unions. (Some supporters of the amendment say it would not. Either way it's a very badly worded amendment.)

[nredman]

Holy ****!!! Mary Rou endrosed Bush!!! I'm changing my vote to George W. Bush!

[davesimondotcom]

Originally posted by Mithras:
Professional athletes are perhaps the only people less qualified than Hollywood stars to give informed comment on foreign and domestic policy.

(I'm a little late to this party, but I'll throw in my 2 cents.)

I would disagree with you here. I don't think these particular athletes are less qualified just because they are athletes.

For instance, John Elway is a graduate of Stanford with a degree in economics, I believe. He was talented enough to get drafted in both the NFL and Major League Baseball. And he had a good long career with the Denver Broncos, in which he led his team to 5 Super Bowls, twice coming away a Champion.

I watched Elway from the time he came into the league (I'm a rabid Bronco fan.) He went from a punk kid who threatened to not ever play in the NFL if he didn't get traded from the Colts (who drafted him) to a bonafide leader on the playing field and off.

Since retirement, he's gone on to build a successful business as a car dealership owner and has purchased ownership in his own Arena League football team. He is also a charitable man who takes part in his community.

Steve Largent is more than just an NFL Hall of Famer, he's also a Congressman.

Jack Nicklaus is more than the greatest golfer of all time. He's also a successful course designer and business man.

Chris Spielman was never a spoiled brat athlete. Although his talent took him from high school to Ohio State to the NFL, he earned a place as one of my heros when he quit football in the prime of his career to be with his wife as she battled breast cancer. He went back to playing two years later only to have his career cut short again, this time by a neck injury.

Karl Malone plays in the NBA, but in the real world he owns his own trucking company. He is more than an athlete, he's a successful businessman.

Roger Staubach didn't start his NFL career until after he served in the United States Navy after graduating from Annapolis. He served his country before becoming a well-paid athlete who led his team to glory.

Dot Richardson is much more than a two-time gold medalist and softball comentator. She is also an orthopedic sergeon.

These are just facts from the top of my head. I know these people because I look up to these people. They are some of my role models and heros. Not because they are athletes, because they are good people. I can honestly say I look up to each of these people, not because they play sports, not because they support the President, but because they are exceptional.

I could probably have continued and made this post even longer. But these were the names that popped out to me. I also find it interesting the diversity on this list. Lynn Swan (the sideline commentator who DIDN'T kill his wife), Ernie Banks, Karl Malone, Anthony Munoz, Carlos Beltran, not exactly a list of old white guys.

[DeathToWindows]

and why do their endorcements matter at ALL?


A: they don't

[olePigeon]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Bush believes it's a "choice" if a person is gay, Kerry believes that a person is born gay. How much worse is it for Kerry to oppose gay marriage (and he does), considering he feels that it's not a choice?

Kerry: "I know you guys can't help it, but I don't want you to be able to marry either."

In this instance, does he sound like the more rational and compassionate of the two?

Kerry also believes that life begins at conception, but the key difference here is that Kerry respects the individual's right to choose, your freedom of choice. Hell, Lutherans should appreciate that.

I very much disapprove of homosexuality. I was brought up that way and I feel it's wrong. However, when peoples' civil liberties are being sh*tted on, that's where I draw the line.