Read all about it, then vote for me!

One of the programmers for Core Systems and designer on the Lara Croft series of computer games was caught in a sting operation designed to catch pedophiles by offering to procure young girls for sexual rendezvous in return for a healthy fee. Kenneth Lockley contacted "Veronica's Escorts", a web site actually run by California state police as a sting cover, sent them a picture of a 6 year old girl asking that a sexual encounter be arranged for him with some similar girl, and stating, "I need to have someone soon or I may rape a little girl instead and I do not really want to do that." That prompted the police to contact Scotland Yard, their only information on his whereabouts being a reference to living in London. A "date" was arranged. Lockley paid the money to a would-be go-between, knocked on the indicated hotel room door, and called the name of the 9 year old girl he was told was waiting for him, "Amy." Police then arrested him. At his trial it came out that he had been charged in a recent case with attempting to have unlawful intercourse with a 13 year girl, but charges were dropped due to lack of evidence. This time, though, the evidence was clear and he plead guilty.

Now this guy obviously represents a clear and present danger to children everywhere, right? The court has a responsibility to secure the safety of society's children, right?

He got 18 months in jail. And he only has to serve 9 months of that.

Is it just me or is there a serious problem with Britain's pedophilia laws? Since there was no physical victim and the only charge that would stick was "attempting to incite procurement," the judge's hands were tied. How do you like that? He says, explicitly, that he will rape a young girl if one is not provided for him, and they can only cool him off for 9 months?? Give me a break....

So, it's that time again. Time for the 2000 Election to heat up. Last election, I called it all the way down the line. On the other hand, who could have seen Monica Lewinsky and the scandal that would taint the Clinton's legacy? What a dork... Now, though, we've got Bush, trying his best to live down a checkered private life and even more darkly checkered political life, and Gore, who seems to have probably the cleanest, or most well hidden, private life in politics today, and a reasonably good political career albeit in the shadow of the Clinton administration.

Ok, here's my initial take: I don't really care for either one. Bush rankles me more, though. Here's a comparison:

Bush

• Sweetheart deals with his with campaign contributors, including Texas state tax paid deals for donors and business colleagues, including $135 million of new sales tax money that went directly into the pockets of Bush and friends.
• Bush and his staff intervened to protect a huge funeral home company that gave lots of money to Bush and his dad (the former president), and Bush has lied under oath to avoid testifying in the whistleblower lawsuit that resulted (sound familiar?). Takes extreme measures, including money, lawsuits, or the Texas state police when possible, to prevent anyone from criticizing him. What's the problem, pal? You're in the public light. You put yourself there. This is part of that.
• Profited from insider stock sale just before his dad launched the Gulf War.
• His foreign business partner at Harken Energy gained access to President Bush and the U.S. National Security Adviser (Scowcroft) after Harken purchased Bush Jr.'s oil company. Hmmmmmm.......

Gore

• He tends to weasel when under fire. He's the King of Straight Talk as long as he's in green pastures, but bring up his record of obtaining campaign contributions and he starts to duck and roll. It's a bad-politician tactic that I find distasteful in comparison to just saying, "Hm. Well, alright, I guess I was wrong. Thanks for pointing that out. I sure got my buns toasted on that one, huh?"
• Braggart. For those new to the Web scene, Gore did *not* invent the Internet. It's bad that he bends the truth to get out of trouble, it's just plain irritating that he bends it to make himself look unreasonably good.

Economically, this is a no-brainer. Clinton's policies, mixed with the cabinet he put together, has at its worst bested Reagonomics during its hay day. Of course, that isn't saying much. "Reagonomics Sucks" was the battle cry of every blue collar worker and Democratic campaigner from sea to shining sea for 12 years running. George Bush (former president) supported Reagonomics, much to 99% of the population's chagrin, and you can bet Bush Jr. will take us back there with his Old Millionaire Boys Club approach to politicking. Gore, on the other hand, would be stupid to try to fix something that ain't broke.

Politically, though, Gore may be a bit of a boor on occasion, but Bush just plain sticks in my craw. He's dirty, and I can't imagine putting a man like that at the helm. Better an overly straight-laced politician (especially after Clinton) than a dirty one.

By the way, some of my information for this page came from The Skeleton Closet, an excellent source for information on various political figures.