You should check the response then.
Do you think I am alone in thinking that four more years of Bush may be what's necessary to wake up the American people? Andy Stern, head of the Service Employees Union, confided to the Washington Post's David Broder that another four years of Bush might be less damaging than the stifling of needed reform within the party and the labor movement that would occur if Kerry becomes president. He later recanted, presumably after "a couple hours of being forced to stand on a milk crate with a copy of the party platform over his head and electrodes attached to his penis Stern ... said he was 'a hundred per cent' for Kerry," as left-wing columnist Alexander Cockburn puts it.
You should know better.
And really, Johnny, we've been over this. But to help you out, besides the war thing, here's a couple more issues:
Kerry told James Hoffa of the Teamsters this spring that he wouldn't touch the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge but would "drill everywhere else like never before".
In an interview with BusinessWeek (August 2nd) Kerry revealed, "I am going to bring Corporate America to the table to say: How do we make you more competitive? How do we get out of your way? Research-and-development tax credits? I'd make them permanent and larger. Manufacturing tax credits? That's a smart way to help I am 100% in favor of companies going abroad to do business."
And in May, he said this:
"I will not appoint somebody with a 5-4 court who's about to undo Roe v. Wade. I've said that before," Kerry told the Associated Press. "But that doesn't mean that if that's not the balance of the court, I wouldn't be prepared ultimately to appoint somebody to some court who has a different point of view. I've already voted for people like that. I voted for Judge [Antonin] Scalia."
Just how he reconciles someone who won't overturn Roe v. Wade with someone who holds a different view, presumably an anti-choice view, is beyond me.
And those points also address this:
Well, I've just given you some more examples.
Look, Johnny, you have a bad candidate. Simple as that. The Democrats are incapable of providing a real alternative. The Democratic Party is run by rubber-spined wimps who think the only votes to "get" are those undecided between voting Republican or Democrat. These chimps should be going after the young vote, the Latino vote, etc., in which case they wouldn't have to try to outdo the Republicans by draping themselvs cynically with the flag.
Do you think the Democrats are that different from the Republicans? Consider this:
Peace activists among the delegates at the DNC were not allowed to bring literature or clothing that expressed an anti-war stance. Medea Benjamin, who advocates voting for Kerry in swing states, was thrown out of the convention hall after unfurling a banner calling for an end to the occupation of Iraq. Other activists were barred from entering with headscarves that read "Delegates for Peace" and one California delegate with a flyer entitled "No War on Iraq" was prevented from bringing it onto the floor of the convention hall.
Isn't this the kind of thing that you and other supposed liberals on this site have decried when the Republicans have perpetrated it?
It's not about being a non-conformist, Brian, it's about being true to what you believe in.