Too Much Infield, Not Enough Tarp

[dreissig]

Kerry wants us to believe that he's a liberal Democrat who has been seasoned by war but supports it when diplomacy fails.

The tarp doesn't cover enough infield. In my opinion, he can be two out of three but not all three at the same time.

He can be a liberal Democrat who opposes war; seasoned by war but supports it; or a liberal Democrat who supports war but knows nothing about it. In fact Kerry is probably not as liberal as he pretends; not as seasoned by war as he would like us to think; and not as antiwar as his turgid speeches suggest. The tarp doesn't quite cover the infield, but it doesn't have to ... he keeps moving it around.

Like domestic tranquillity? Don't nominate Kerry. He's not enough of an alternative.

[lastknowngood]

1. no difference at all in policy

only in IQ.

[library_max]

2. You are aware that we're talking about different wars, right?

The IWR vote has been explained hundreds of times. It was not a declaration of war. And you don't have to "know nothing about it" to make the reasonable assumption (reasonable back then) that the President of the United States was not lying about WMD intelligence.

This is such a stupid meme. Most of the country, including the people we need to win over if we want to have any hope of winning the election, were either convinced by Bush or gave him the benefit of the doubt at the time. "Bush lied, people died" has resonance. "We were smart, you were dumb, we knew Bush was a lying a**hole all the time" doesn't.

And even if you weren't so obviously wrong, what good do you think you're doing by bringing this up for the thousandth time? You're not going to change anybody's mind, you're just pissing people off.

[Joseph Thule]

3. Don't vote for him, then.