I make the distinction between ‘leader’ and ‘representative’, one I believe more people should consider. Kerry makes a great representative in that he ponders the desires of the people and tries to find a comfortable middle ground which will offend no one. Bush is a leader precisely because he is willing to flip the bird while following his convictions.
Now, I don’t agree with many (most) of his convicitons, and this is where the whole process has led me to drinking too much wine and posting in the pit, but I voted for him because he refuses to pitch them when they become inconvenient.
Arrogantly charging into an unnecessary war to settle a personal grudge is “leadership?” You have a very low threshhold for what you expect out of a leader.
Was there a non-“homophobe” choice, other than a 3rd party guy? Kerry says he’s against gay marriage, and would support a state constitutional amendment banning it. Can I be against federal legislation banning interracial marriage, but for state laws banning the same and not be a racist?
I like Diogenes a lot. I didn’t always. He’s like two posters in one. Diogenes is a great person and like all great people his flaws are also great.
He’s my absolute favorite left-wing nutjob (and I mean that with affection.) He’s stubborn myopic and prejudicial, unpleasant and thick… and at the same time he’s also this insightful and nice guy who will sometimes listen and respond with great care and respect…
And then in the next post he’ll go off raving again
And the one after that he’ll be really cool again.
He knows a fair bit about theology, doesn’t ever seem to hold a grudge.
He’s really the only poster on this board who can make me laugh, shake my head at his stupidity, educate me with his insight, disgust me with his vitriol, make me smile with a sincere compliment, and call me a Nazi bastard… all in the same thread.
Nor has JohnKerry. No bigger bird has ever been flipped in the face of opposition and terrorism than the ones John Kerry flipped when he relentlessly led the investigation that uncovered the Iran/Contra scandal and shut down the terrorist’s international banking institution, or when he partnered with John McCain, again against huge opposition, to put the Vietnam POW issue to rest and normalize relations with a former enemy.
But you obviously didn’t pay attention to the facts and you bought into Bush’s lie that leadership has some kind of blustery, scowling cowboy face on it, as opposed to being a trait wherein the one performing it actually accomplishes worthwhile goals that benefit not only our own great nation, but the entire world, as well. Shame on you.
But back to the original post and your fast and loose comparisons of Hitler and Bush.
While I’m no fan of revisionist history, your train of thought throughout the thread (and the ones prompting it) has me wondering what you’d think of this scenario…
Hitler was spanked out of Eastern Europe and told to stay in his room until he could keep his hands to himself. The bright minds of the day wrung their hands and insisted that he should have been forced out of power, but the international contract by which all ‘nice’ nations conducted themselves decided to let him have his little slice of Rhineland as long as he played well with his neighbors. Later, when it was reported that Hitler ‘may’ have wmd and ‘may’ be aiding and abetting terrorist groups, (or ‘may’ be gassing his own populace) a polite group of international investigators shows up for a dog and pony show. After much dicking around and a parade of ultimatums from the international community, Churchill finally stands up and says ‘fuck you, Adolf. You’re too dangerous and too close and we’re putting you out, with or without unilateral support. He’s called a facist for doing it, and goes down in history as England’s most hamfisted leader ever.
Like I said, I’m no fan of revisionist history, but you open yourself up to it with silly claims of Hitler>Bush
It’s pretty much a semantic thing with Kerry. He supports civil unions, he just doesn’t want to call it marriage. He has not advocated abrogating any substantive rights.
The COTUS amendment, on the other hand, would not even permit civil unions.
A vote for Bush was a vot for a candidate who wants to permanently eliminate even the chance for civil unions in any state.
Yes, I know what he said about civil unions last week. His own amendment contradicts those statements. You acan’t support an amendment for prohibiting the use or sale of all alcohloic beverages and then say people should be allowed to drink beer.
If that’s the way he really feels, then he needs to advocate for changing the language in the amendment. If he won’t do that, then he’s a real bigot trying to hurt gay people in a real and lasting way.
Kerry’s just full of shit about the wording. That’s politics, not substance.
Diogenes - I am on your side, and I still can’t see how people can be so blind, foolish, selfish, or just brainwashed to have voted for Bush.
Now I am fearing that Canada may not be far away enough to be safe.
I was re-reading “Contact” by Carl Sagan this week and he has a line in there that says: When we like them we call them Freedom Fighters, when we don’t we call them Terrorists.
The USA seems incapable of seeing that to another people, such as many in the Arab world that the so called Acts of Terror may be considered to be justifiable acts in fighting for freedom.
Those they call terrorists will be fighting for their rights ever more so now that Bush has been re-elected – in this war against the USA - I pray that they don’t hit Canada.
I think it was a factor. My neighbors down the street were on the fence until one weekend where they swore that the next stupid thing they heard from one side would push them to vote for the other side. Shortly afterwards, Cher said that if Bush wins, gays would be shipped off to a single state and quarentined. They swore that tipped the scales.
Talking to them today, the wife didn’t go through with it; she voted for Kerry. The husband - who was a Gore 2000 voter - voted Bush, pushed over the edge by a whiny liberal celebrity.
He told me today that he figured Virginia would go Bush no matter what, so he wasn’t actually hurting anything.
tdn, you’re right on the money, sort of. Doesn’t matter WHO sleeps at 1600 Penn. Blvd, or WHO goes to work at the Capitol, we need to keep an eye on things. A Big Eye. One that looks into all the cracks, crevices and ratholes. The gov’t should be under the watchful eye of the people, not the other way 'round. But we’re not interested in the day-to-day operations, which is when crap like the patriot act happens, in the middle of the night, or on a slow tuesday afternoon, when nobody’s lookin.
I’m tellin’ ya, DtC is off the bloody deep end with the Hitler/Bush comparison, it simply does not jibe. Still, we’ve gotta be over that guys’ shoulder for the next 4 years. Him, and that fucking ashcroft. Now THERE, see, THAT is a comparison, Hitler=Ashcroft, THAT makes more sense.
(I kid, really…well, sort of)
You’re behind the times. The wording of that amendment acually was changed to allow cilvil unions.
As for Kerry, maybe that was his problem. Most people don’t want to have to decipher some kind of code to figure out where he “really” stands on issues. At least Bush says what he thinks.
