I fear that Sen Kerry overestimates us. His vote on the resolution was nuanced and regretable. If it has any substantial failing, it is in trusting the promises of GeeDubya to exhaust every avenue before going to war. As we now know, he never had any such intention, he offered such promises only as a means to his end. Sen Kerry trusted GeeDubya, more fool him.
But who is more culpable: the man who buys a “lemon” at a used car lot, or the man who sells it to him?
And laigle? Your assault on friend Airman is ill advised. He has shown himself on numerous occassions to be open minded and amenable to reason. He is cantankerous and obstreperous, to be sure. But he has given no cause to believe that he favors the politics of dictatorship.
He just really doesn’t like liberals. Some people don’t like puppies. What of it?
I agree. I’d especially would like him to take the offensive far more on the status of the Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction, and various events there. I feel Bush is very vulnerable there, but the Democrats haven’t paid nearly enough attention to the issue campaigning-wise (especially with regards to television ads).
As a wise man once said, “Who is more foolish: the fool, or the fool who follows him?”
I don’t believe polls. Heck, I’ve yet to answer one with any degree of truthfulness; somewhere in England there’s a market researcher who thinks I make over £100,000 a year and have two children named Tarquin and Chloe. The proof of the election is in the voting. But I do agree that Kerry is going to get steamrolled if he and his fellow Democrats don’t come up with both a message and a big bucket of charisma sharpish.
Vote Democrat. Lord knows they haven’t been even remotely liberal since the Carter era.
Post #28 by mhendo will go down in history (for me) as the day bullshit was stopped in its tracks. I salute you sir. That was a breath of fresh air on the SDMB.
At no time did I ever claim to be a liberal. Generally speaking I am against the “liberal” ideology as it is generally understood. I do not agree with most of the things that Kerry says, I do not agree with a lot of the things Kerry has done, and if the Republicans were running what I consider to be a viable candidate I would almost certainly be voting Republican.
However, there has been too much that has happened in the last four years for me to vote for Bush in good conscience. That’s all there is to it. That does not make me a Kerry lover, that does not make me a Democrat, that makes me a thoughtful, conscientious voter. Don’t criticize me just because you are unable to make the leap of logic that allows me to vote for a man that I do not agree with, and a man who does not get exempted from criticism just because I have chosen to vote for him.
You want my opinion of Bush? If Kerry gets elected, you will have it on January 20, 2005 at 12:01 PM. Until then I will reserve my comments to the above. But Kerry is fair game until then, and once he is inaugurated I will restrain my comments about him.
Any other criticisms you have about me based upon a totally false premise?
I’m going to hafta to disagree with you on this one, 'luc – for if you open just about any thread even slighty critical of Herr Bush and Co., you’re more likely than not to find Doors, hunkered down, M-16 at the ready, prepared to defend The Great Misleader to the death of his enemies or his – whichever comes first.
I realize Kerry is badly in need of votes, but listening to what people like Doors and Lib are saying about him – even while claiming they’ll vote for him anyway – I think they are doing him a great disservice.
Price’s too high, IMHO. Might be Big Tent, by why allow it to fill with hate from the inside?
Really? My honest opinion is unwelcome? Let me put it another way:
If I have the choice between a bully and a pseudo-intellectual snob to make appropriate decisions that effect my life, why would I vote for the bully, even if I agree with him on a lot of things? All he’s going to do is get me into fights. On the other hand, the pseudo-intellectual snob is completely at odds with my beliefs but I will nonetheless vote for him not because I trust him or believe in anything he says, but my conscience won’t allow me to vote for the bully.
Does that mean that I have to be a rah-rah guy for him? No. He is still worthy of criticism, just as the bully is still worthy of defending from the most egregiously false criticisms.
Why are you guys unable to understand that this is a question of conscience and not of ideology?
RedFury, you’re out of line. Airman is not always in full command of the facts, perhaps, none of us is, but he never has any kind of denial problem when he finds out otherwise.
He’s as straight-up and thoughtful a poster as you’ll find here, and has as much integrity as you’ll find in any man. He is most certainly not a Bush supporter at all, much less a knee-jerk one.
Apart from the “agreeing with Bush on a lot of things” part, I pretty much agree with all of that (including the pseudo-intellectual snob bit, although frankly I’m one too so it probably bothers me less). And FWIW I second Elv1s’s comments about you.
I don’t like Kerry – he’s demonstrated the leadership ability of a damp lemon over the course of this campaign, and I think he’d be a weak and ineffectual President. But I’d still rather have him than someone I believe is actively damaging this country economically, militarily, diplomatically and indeed morally.
I’ll be the first to admit that it wasn’t always that way. I used to be about as partisan as anyone around. But you know what? I took the blinders off when I realized that a) Not everything that Bush or the Republicans say or do is a good idea (in fact, most of the time they’re downright awful ideas), and b) every once in a while the Democrats have a good argument, one that’s worth investigating, even if it does turn out to be flawed or fruitless. Some of those arguments have proven to be convincing, however, for example the argument for gay marriage, which I once vehemently opposed and now support.
However, I’m still living down my early days here. And so these attacks will continue from people who have only the recollection of what I was, not what I’ve become. So be it. Reputations are hard to live down, and especially mine, the hard-ass arrogant aggressive far right-wing conservative on what is largely a liberal board. Even if it’s no longer the case.
I don’t think your reply is particularly snide. But it is evasive. Rather than discuss the relevance of the newest poll in light of my argument and cite, you have tried to misdirect the discussion into whether or not liberals are hypocritical, and that is irrelevant. I didn’t create the system, but if it is good enough to elect Bush, it is good enough to elect Kerry.
But that is not the issue your OP raised, and it is not a relevent response to my argument. I will respond as soon as I see any cogent thoughts from you that refute my argument, but so far, none has been forthcoming.
When come back, bring debate.
mhendo, thanks for the yeoman defense of my argument in my absence.
Pardonnez moi? Hast thou taken it upon thyself to pervert my words intentionally, or was it merely a case of a reading comprehension problem? My quote you post, and in which you for some reason seemed to feel the need to insert the word [Bush] (and in brackets), was referring to God as being the protector, not Bush.
The reason was that the poster I was answering was of the opinion that God may allow Bush to be reelected simply to make him unhappy. My quasi-humorous post was meant as a jibe to him. You have either wrongfully or deliberately misstated my words to make it appear I said it Bush who knew what was best for this other poster. And while this may indeed be the case :D, it isn’t what I said.
I would appreciate it if in the future you are going to quote me, that you do so accurately.
Well then Kerry needs to distance himself from the Democratic Party. This is just the “National Security” section. Search any of their “What’s at stake” items and you’ll find nary a mention of Kerry’s “vision”.
Good answer – and perhaps what I am guilty of. I tend to get involved with this board in fits and starts. And then mostly when there’s a particular topic of interest to me. Last such time was the Iraq Invasion Marketing Campaign, and, as you say yourself, we weren’t exactly seeing eye to eye then. From then on, I admit to not really following your posting history as I was missing most of the time anyway. Till recently that is, for the upcoming election has led me back to reading and posting to the board with some regularity.
So, armed with that particular prejudice about you, and happening unto your comments on the original F-9/11 thread, I felt it was just more of the same. Fast forward to some other, random posts of yours (such as this one and this one or even this one upthread) and the rightwing partisan image I have of you was only re-inforced.
However, I now admit I may have been too hasty in responding to elucidator’s comment on your behalf. For after reading your own measured reply, I went on an ‘Airman Doors Hunt’ by doing a search on your recent posting history. The bad news: not such a great hunting expedition, for you do come across quite a bit more moderate than I remembered. The good news? Same. While we certainly still don’t agree on many things, I think you’ve come a long way from those referenced early days. But for now, I’ll take our similarities as opposed to our differences.
Plenty of time to discuss those after November second. Hell, I might even admit to being wrong on an issue or five…which, :::shudder::: would, almost by default make you right on same. But I doubt it
Anyway, clean slate on my end, trust you’ll do the same at yours.
With my regards to you and your obviously much smarter spouse, Mrs Robyn.
