I knew it! Kerry is a conservative
 

From the horse's mouth:

"I'm a hunter. I'm a gun owner. A lot of people on the left don't like that, but that's who I am," he said.

The Massachusetts senator has already begun his effort to broaden his political reach. During a recent swing through the Midwest, where he tramped around farms and toted a shotgun on a trap-shooting range, Kerry said that he represented "conservative values," and emphasized his personal opposition to abortion.

Conservative values!? Yeah, well, stick 'em, pal.

So let's review. Kerry...

--Voted to attack Iraq.
--Opposes withdrawing from Iraq.
--Supports Sharon and the Bush roadmap for the Palestine conflict.
--Supports the Israel's "security fence" that is strangling the Palestinians even though he told Palestinians last year that it was not needed.
--Is "pro-life," saying he believes life begins at conception.
--Opposes gay marriage.
--Voted for the Patriot Act.
--Voted for No Child Left Behind.

Gotta love those Democrats for giving the voters a real alternative. ;)

Ya know..
 

He said that ("I'm a conservative, More conservative than the conservatives claim to be"-John Kerry) back during the Oklahoma primary and it buried him, He finished a distant third to the eventual winner Clark & runner-up Edwards.

Btw, ya left out that Kerry also voted against the Laci Peterson act which protects pregnant women.

Bless your heart - owning a gun does not make you a conservative :rolleyes: I know many a D that has more than one. I know I know you hate them, but many like them and then there is that whole pesky Second Amendment issue :laugh:

Seriously, as I have said many times before, getting rid of all guns is nice notion, but it will NEVER happen EVER. So, I say the best path is to regulate them to the effect of making people regiter them every year and making them do a new balistics test every year. But, that is too onerous for the NRA and that is why IMO the NRA is as insane as the people who thinks ridding the America is a feasible plan.

AND - the is issue is pro-choice. When I personally think life begins does not really factor into the equation. My opinion on whether I think you (general) should have the choice to make up your own mind is the SOLE issue in abortion as long as the first trimester issue in Roe holds. Interestingly, Roe does not base its holding of life begining at conception. It is based solely on the viability of the fetus (which has always been alive or at least capable of life in some fashion) outside of the womb. For now, that is after the first trimester.

Yup, I don't know if I'll be voting Kerry in November, that's for damn sure. I'm in MA, so it really wouldn't make a difference if I did or didn't; he's going to take this state anyway. Unfortunately, I don't know if I'd be able to live with myself if I did vote Kerry. I've been very disatisfied with him lately and I think I'm going to curtail my support. :wavey:

Holy s--t...
 

Hell just was hit by the largest iceberg outbreak & sub-zero temperatures in it's LONG history...Just kiddin' ya :lol: :laugh: :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Jason, I wasn't talking about just guns. Besides, it appears your interpretation of the Second Amendment differs from mine. I can read, and I know what it says, and what it says is not what the NRA says it says.

Dissention, can't say I'm surprised. I've picked up some vibes from you lately.

Also, my own revelation:

I'm not sure I'm voting for Nader now. I am looking at the Green Party candidate.

But I WILL NOT VOTE FOR KERRY.

Yup, I've had it up to here with the bull****. He's a neocon in sheeps clothing, the only thing that distinguishes him is that he has a better track record on the environment. At this point, his campaign is in tatters because NO ONE knows where he stands on things. People are sick of the backtracking, myself included.

No Nader, no Kerry, so...David Cobb it is for me. :wavey:

I may soon join you.

Exactly dissention..Kerry should be presenting a clear cut message on where he stands on the issues...Bashing Bush on everything he does will not win him an election in the end IMO...He should also be focused on us undecided voters (like myself), who if he gave a reason to vote for him...would...but all he cares to do IMO is bash Bush...ok we get that point already Kerry, we know you dont like Bush and disagree with the Iraq war...give us something else! Will there be a NONE OF THE ABOVE box on the ballot this year???

Chris

Sure there will be...
 

except instead of stating "None Of The Above" it will say "The Next American Idol" :lol:

I was talking of the USSC's interpretation of the Second Amendment because the U.S. Const has not been strictly inpterpreted for well over 100 years - see Roe and the expansion of the right to privacy, a right mentioned no where in the Const. Their opinion is the law and they see the Second Amendment not just within the confines of a "militia" :shrug: Plus, there is no way the Founding Fathers meant in any way to exclude personal ownership of guns, etc., since they all had guns and the thought at the time was almost nonexistent :shrug: But, that is a far cry from saying the right of ownership of guns without any regulation violates the Second Amendment; clearly there needs to be HEAVY regulation of them :cool: A good example is the right to free speech does not allow a person to scream "fire" in a crowded theatre. That part of free speech is curtailed to protect society. Again, if we could get rid of all of the guns, I am all for it. I just think that is impossible and not facing the situation with any reasonable or practicle solution.

Also, I was commenting on the statements "I'm a hunter. I'm a gun owner. A lot of people on the left don't like that, but that's who I am" and "During a recent swing through the Midwest, where he tramped around farms and toted a shotgun on a trap-shooting range, Kerry said that he represented "conservative values," and emphasized his personal opposition to abortion." I took that to mean toting a shotgun was inconsistent with being a liberal, which I commented on. Then, I commented on the abortion thing being about freedom of choice and just because someone thinks life begins at conception and that abortion is wrong, does not mean they are anti-prochoice. I know many people who think that way who are SCREAMING liberals - look at James Carville :laugh:

Anyway - food for thought and not meant in an antagonistic manner :cool:

I guess I am just more practicle. I want W out so bad and I know Kerry is the only other horse in the race. I hate that it is a two horse race, but that is the way it is. I know Carne has said that social upheaval is a good thing and may happen if W gets reelected, but I do not think that will ever happen and I think the damage W could do in his second term is not worth the risk, etc. So, while I agree Kerry is not my ideal by any means, I will vote for him in a minute to try and ensure the rejection of W.

BTW - I think Kerry is depending on a lot of people just like me.

As an aside, I think people expect too meuch from politicians. No one is ever going to fall within a simple set of labels :cool: :eek: :woohoo:

This really depresses me :rolleyes:. So either way it looks like four more years of Bush. :distress:

Interestingly, you made me recall a conversation I had with a liberal friend just before the 2000 election. At the time, it seemed the Democrats' major objection to voting for Nader (aside from the bull**** vote-stealing rationale) was the issue of abortion. Now, I believe in the right to choose, but that single issue does not determine my vote.

Anyway, during this conversation, I mentioned to my friend that I wished there were fewer abortions. You would think I had condemned any and all women who ever had, or thought about having, an abortion. Her reaction was almost violent. I had to very gingerly explain that I wasn't condemning anyone and that I fully support the right to choose as defined by Roe v. Wade, but that personally I would rather see the number of abortions decrease and that I probably would not opt for one if I ever were in a position to contribute to such a decision.

Now comes Kerry and he says he is personally opposed to abortion and that he believes life starts at conception. I'll have to ask my friend if this bothers her.

Aside from that, shouldn't John Kerry limit himself to declaring whether he supports Roe v. Wade? Saying he personally opposes abortion is such a scoundrel's defense to make himself look good to the conservatives.

True. But ought party affiliation not mean something? If Democrats are aligning with Republicans on most important issues of the day, do we not need a party that represents what we believe in?

Even though he may truly believe that and that may have been the question asked, etc., he is a politician and he is gonna give a politician's answer :laugh:

Exactly. A vote for Kerry is a vote for Bush.

Now Now - its Bush lite :laugh:

Seriously, Kerry more lilely than not would not have prompted the Legislation Bush has. So there is that difference. But, the facts suggest Kerry is not the huge liberal the conservative press is painting him as.

Hold on one cotton pickin' minute ( :lol: ) -

You're in the South, you NEED to vote for Kerry. It doesn't matter whether or not I do because I live in MA, a guaranteed blue state. Even though I'm tired of the BS in the Kerry camp, he's still better than Bush on his worst day. If given the choice between Kerry and Bush, choose Kerry. :xoxo:

Now, even though I'm tired of Kerry's waffling, he still has some great platforms. I think he has given much more than 'I dislike Bush, he wasn't diplomatic.' He's given much more than that and some of his ideas are pretty good. What's turning me off if is his desperate attempts to appear as conservative as possible and his attempts to disassociate from the people who gave him his career: the far-left. Without us, he'd be just another rich guy living off his rich wife and it pisses me off to no end that he badmouths the very people who will vote for him. It's not cool.

I don't think it's four more years of Bush, it's Bush-lite. :laugh: j/k

No, seriously, a lot of the **** Kerry says is being said in an attempt to get southern and midwest votes. I don't think half of it is true. But that's what pisses me off, like I said in my above post. He wants nothing to do with the people who made him.

. . . but it is smart. The middle of the road in about five or so states is what will win this election. Kerry and to a lesser extent W are myopic when it comes to this point. They know if things stay the same, these are really the only people who count in the election issue. I think they think their bases are not going anywhere due to the polarization in the country right now.

Well, Kerry claimed that he would sign the Kyoto Protocol into effect, but I have a sneaking suspicion that he was just blowing smoke up our left ass cheeks. ;)

No, it's not smart. He's going to lose a lot of votes to Nader and Cobb in those five states because of it and he doesn't want that.

I often think Clinton signed the KP ( :cool: ) as a political ploy. He knew it had no chance of ever going into effect. I think the signatory countries had no intention of implementing it and Clinton knew if we did not then they really would not. I mean they could do it on their own - yet how many have :shrug: But, Clinton looked good by signing it.

and that is a shame because we all know "they" can make cars that get over 100 MPG and still perform well, etc. But, King Oil will never have that happen - Sad, very true.

He got some good digs in on Larry King last week:

King: "What did you make of Cheney's outburst on the Senate floor?"
Kerry: "I don't know what to make of Dick Cheney. Period."

King: "Did you see Fahrenheit 9/11?"
Kerry: "No, I lived it for four years."

:laugh:

"Ooh, the tar people are back again..." :lol:

That has yet to be demonstrated in a proveable manner or at least that any base votes he loses outweigh the potential to be gained. The minute he loses more than he gains (based on polls I guess) - he will stop it. It is pure politics 101 IMO.

Did he borrow them from Stevie :lol:

:laugh:

He lifted her suede ones when she was in Boston taping the DVD. That must be why she only wore them for one night. :laugh:

See, I still disagree with that.
I may not be 100% thrilled with Kerry as a candidate, but I thoroughly believe that he WILL be a better president than George W. Bush, despite his conservatism.

And while he may not be actively supporting gay marriages... much to my complete disappointment... at least John Kerry is not actively supporting the amendment to ban gay marriages, as W. is doing.

We have a very hateful, intolerant, hypocritical man in the White House right now, and he needs to be ousted, PRONTO.

End of rant. :o

Kerry's a jackass. Of course, he couldnt be much worse than Dubya, so what the hell...

Oh for heaven's sake...
 

y'all just should just come flat out and admit y'all want a Lindsey/Stevie ticket in 2004 :lol:

A black dress, platform boots & a Turner 1 in each and every household :nod:

"Think About It... & Come" vote for the Linds'/Stevie ticket in 2004 :lol: :nod: :lol:

What percentage would it take for you not to vote for Kerry? And how do you know he will be that much better than Kerry?

Why are middle-of-the-road Democrats so insistent on deluding themselves? Bush lied to get into Iraq. I knew it then. I know it now. Clinton lied to get into the Kosovo conflict. But he was lucky enough not to get any Americans killed. Clinton lied about a lot of things.

Clinton passed the disastrous Welfare bill. NAFTA. Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Etc. The Internet explosion was what buoyed the economy in the 1990s, so whoever was in the White House would have enjoyed the spoils, as Clinton did.

Why do I bring up Clinton? Because like to admit it or not, the country continued to veer to the right while he was in office. With Bush, this has accelerated. With Kerry, the rightward turn will slow, but it will not turn left by any stretch of the imagination. Kerry sucks for the reasons I posted earlier. I understand the pragmatism of those who want Bush out, but when Kerry loses and the Democrat voters get frustrated, are they going to take a look at themselves and ever realize why their candidate lost? Are they going to recognize that supporting a guy who is nothing but Republican Lite is a ****ty strategy? Not likely. They'll find some scapegoat or other: the media, Nader, the Republican lies, whatever.

The Democrats need good candidates who are a real alternative. A vote for Kerry is a vote for Bush, and that is unacceptable.

Let me put it this way... as long as W. is the opponent, there is no way that I will vote for anyone other than the Democratic candidate.
If there was a very real way for a candidate from another party to unseat Bush, then perhaps I'd change my mind... but there isn't. And I'm sorry but voting for Nader or anyone else, is a wasted vote right now. And this election is too important to waste your vote.

I realize that Kerry is not going to miraculously turn the tides towards the left, but if you had a gaping wound, you'd put a bandage over it, wouldn't you? The bandage isn't going to heal the wound, but it would at least stop the hemorrhaging, and give you enough time to do something about it... and that's what we need to do.

Surely you can see that this country is filled with extreme conservatives, and it surprises me that you think an extreme liberal is going to win the amount of votes it would take to beat an extreme conservative. Republicans vote in far larger numbers than Democrats do.
I can't imagine that's entirely because of a lack of decent Democratic candidates for the party to support, but rather a concerted effort by the Republican Party to ensure that they continue their stranglehold.

So in order to be more "palatable" to the faction of Republicans who find themselves leaning towards the liberal side, the Democratic candidate has to try to appeal to their sensibilities, as well as still trying to appeal to the sensibilities of the more liberal voters.
It's a tightrope that they have to walk very delicately, in order to reach the broadest amount of voters possible.

So what we need to do, is to stop squabbling about whether the Democratic candidate is too conservative, or if he's truly liberal, and just get out and vote to get W. out of the White House, plain and simple.

Obviously you meant Bush. ;)
And I'll tell you one very good reason I know Kerry will be better than Bush... he and John Edwards plan to vote against the amendment to ban gay marriages, while Bush is actively supporting it.
So while Kerry may not be doing cartwheels in support of gay marriage, he's also not doing everything in his power to stop it... and that's all the proof I need that he's a better man for the job than George W. Bush.
I'll be damned if a man who's had a cocaine addiction and an alcohol addiction, and has had numerous shady business dealings, is going to tell ME what's good for "the moral fabric" of this country.

mmmmmmm....sexiest white house ever......

Shrub better be careful...
 

or our resident "librarian" may have to throw books at his happy ass.

Btw, Don't throw "See Tip Run" at "W.", Since that is TOO challenging a book for Shrub to read :lol:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Maybe I'll throw Clinton's book... that sucker's so huge, it'd knock him out cold!

Throw the...
 

Bible at Shrub, Make sure it lands on his face so he can see the verse "Judge not, least ye be judged"...But then again he would BS his way around that verse

Btw, I think someone should combine the "Teletubbies" (watch out for that purple one, He "looks" dangerous) with those pesky "WMD's" and make a animated series that "Super Chimp W" could easily understand, That the "WMD's" are similar to the "Teletubbies", That neither one exist :lol: :lol: :lol:

Brian "PBS proudly presents the WMDbuddies" j.

It is so funny in an odd way to me. I totally agree with Carne. I think the lesser of two evils argument is bogus. But, as I said before, I think W is FAR more dangerous than anything Kerry could muster. So, while I think Kerry is FAR from perfect, I do agree with alot of things he has done. So, I can vote for him with a good conscious even though I am not real happy about the lack of choice, etc.