Like 3,000 Americans murdered on 9/11/01 didn’t matter? 
Kerry is a moderate as compared to who?
IMHO, the Democratic party still hasn’t recovered from the black eye they gave themselves following the Wellstone plane crash.
I know I’m growing more and more square with each passing year.
Would anyone be so kind as to explain “teabagging”?
I believe it refers to sqatting over someone and “dunking” one’s testicles on to their face much in the same way you would dunk a teabag into a cup of hot water.
Regarding the OP: I’m still thinking about it…
Just so I’m sure about this, this is a gesture of contempt and derision, yes? No perv undertones, or anything? This isn’t what “In yer face!” means, is it?
And SimonX, you blossoming curmudgeon, its perfectly ok to get squarer every year, long as you start really hip.
I haven’t always been happy with the way Bush has done things, and if another conservative Republican came along to challenge him, I’d give him some consideration. But John Kerry is not an option under any circumstances.
Exactly.
Hmm. If undeniable proof came out that Bush knew that 9/11 was going to happen, WANTED it to happen and is to this day glad it happened because he’s a sick evil SOB who needed a disaster so he could be a cowboy try to save the day and get re-elected, that’d pretty much make me abstain from voting for him on election day. Or if he suddenly woke up one day and announced to the country that he thinks partial birth abortion is just peachy keen and he was wrong to sign the ban on it, that’d probably do it too. I’m sure there are other really bad things he could do to disenchant me, but none of them are likely to happen. For me it’s not about voting Republican. I vote for Democrats all the time (albeit reluctantly). It’s about voting for the guy who I think will do the best job of running the country and whose values most closely reflect my own. Sometimes that’s a Republican, sometimes not.
There is nothing John Kerry could do to make me vote for him, though. I would vote for gulp,sweat Teddy Kennedy before I’d give Botox my vote. Yes, a Kennedy. I’d vote for a lying cheating bloated alcoholic smartass liberal Yankee over Kerry. That’s how bad of a President I think Kerry would turn out to be. He lost me the second he declared that he’d spend his first 100 days of office flying around the world apologizing to the countries we’ve pissed off. I don’t trust anyone who wants to make nicey nice with Kim Jong Il.
Bush is apparently losing some non-imperialist former supporters among Republicans primarily on the score of his expansionist foreign policy. There’s an article about this in the American Prospect:
(Oh by the way, I also think that the OP’s insinuation that Republicans don’t like “cultured and educated” candidates is indefensible. It’s true that some conservatives (including the current President, IMHO) have sometimes pandered to anti-intellectual prejudices, but I think it’s completely unjust to imply that Republicans in general fall for it.)
flickster replied to RNATB: *“John Kerry is a moderate Democrat. Paul Wellstone was a liberal Democrat.”
Kerry is a moderate as compared to who?*
Um, isn’t that the comparison you’re looking for sitting right there in front of you, staring you in the face, if it was a snake it woulda bit you, etc.? Namely, Kerry is a moderate as compared to, e.g., the late Senator Paul Wellstone.
If you’re trying to ask who among living Democratic politicians could be similarly compared to Kerry, I’d suggest liberals such as Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Barney Frank, and Dennis Kucinich.
Oh, really? If it might well save several hundred thousand lives? And the man you trust more, the man you consider more responsible, he wouldn’t either?
So when Mr. Musharaff gets gushing praise poured over his head, about how he’s just the swellest ally a boy ever had, about two weeks after we find out his own personal Mr. Wizard has been conducting a nuclear Amway sale for years…
Compared to this, you find Kerry too willing to cut slack? Kerry too much the hypocrite being willing to cozy up to unsavory characters. That’s Kerry you’re talking about, right? Just to be sure.
AC: I don’t trust anyone who wants to make nicey nice with Kim Jong Il.
Then I think it’s kind of odd you’re supporting Bush, considering that—despite his earlier hard-line “pygmy” and “axis of evil” rhetoric—his Administration has resumed negotiations with NK, and expects to continue them.
Mind you, I’m not faulting this reversal of policy; in fact, I think that negotiations and attempts at some level of diplomatic rapprochement with Kim Jong Il, despite the admitted loathsomeness of his regime, is one of the few things that Bush is currently doing right. But if you are as opposed as you say to any kind of “making nicey nice” with NK, I don’t see why you’d support Bush in doing so.
Do you imply that John Kerry is the most liberal member of the senate? I don’t think you can relate Ashcroft and Kerry in terms of “how far out there” they are. It’s not even a contest.
Of course, Bush isn’t way out there either. He just tried (and was able) to con a majority of Americans into believing that Saddam was responsible for 9/11. He then started a war based on that and other erroneous assumptions. This presents thinking persons with a good reason not to re-elect.
Not all of us look at a half-full glass and assume that we’re entitled to a full one, either. Another reason to vote out he that would protect the riches of the old-money at the expense of the middle-class.
Let’s see…if Kerry were to allow the worst terrorist attack on American soil to occur, then lie about the events leading up to it and what steps he took to prevent it, then go against the U.N. and the opinion of most of the world by attacking Iraq with a very flimsy justification which turns out to be pretty much bald-faced lies, have several of his staff resign and then severely criticize his abilities as president, then take away a good chunk of our civil rights under the guise of fighting terrorism, and do a piss-poor job with the economy…oh, and blur the seperation of church and state. Probably then.
Cite?
You couldn’t pay me to jump into this pool 'o sharks, so I’m going to offer a wise man’s perspective on the subject: http://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2004_03_03.html
As much as I agree with the contention that the Bush administration has been an wholesale disaster (and until I and others like me can get secure jobs, I am summarily discrediting any and all hogwash about how great the economy is), I’m not convinced that Kerry would be much better. He’d certainly be better…he’d almost have to be…but is that worth my vote?
Ironically enough, this is the exact situation I found myself in last election, where Bush was extremely dubious but Gore did nothing to impress. Not an easy choice then, either.
P.S. - You Republicans shouldn’t be complaining, given how astonishingly conservative Great Debates is. Most of the Republican viewpoints I’ve seen expressed here would get ripped to shreds on any other board I go to.
Um, yes? I don’t understand. You think Kerry would be better, but you plan to vote for Bush?
Oh, right… Seeking some greater measure of justice and fairness and equality for every citizen is just so condescending! How dare they care about better lives for everyone! How could anyone bring themselves to vote for a party who advocates that?
No condescension here: people who care more about condescension than basic human rights and civil liberties are people we’d be better off without.
Cite?
I think the folks who are still planning to vote for Bush at this time are the folks who reason, “John Kerry must be a liberal, because if he wasn’t, he wouldn’t be a Democrat! Duh!” 
If you don’t like politicians who treat people with contempt, why back Bush? He thinks we’re dumb enough to believe “the terrorists attacked us because they hate our freedom.” :rolleyes:
I’ll defend my OP once more. I know “conservatives” don’t like Kerry… and many don’t like Bush either. I know that most would still vote party lines rather than go democratic… that is why I ask what it would take for these guys to quit on Bush.
Kerry is certainly lacking in excitment and rhetoric… I like him because his name doesn’t include Bush first and foremost. I do feel the guy has good intentions and has a better shot at being a good president if his party doesn’t muck about. Still he is not Bush.
I want to know the other side… what would Bush do that would make you say… “enough is enough” and switch sides ? Its easy for me to feel the callous Iraq quagmire is enough… but what about for these guys ? Taking Kerry out of the picture what would make or break Bush if the “truth” came out on a certain topic.
(I’m pretty sure if another good Republican came along to compete… he would certainly get better rating than Bush… but thats my opinion only.)
You know, of course, that we’ve known about Mr. Wizard’s activities for years, not weeks.
What if you found out that Bush had trusted known felons, defrauders of Congress, terrorist fundraisers, and those who have illegally passed classified national security secrets to agents of foreign governments, with our national security and with access to classified national security information and gave them influence over our foreign policy?
Would all of these things unfortunate things taken together be enough to sway anyone?