It has been nice to learn so much about Kerry

[AVID]

over the past few days.

And I think I have benefited from the mass media coverage of such a honorable veteran.

However, in the pit of my gut, I fear him as the nominee. I fear the status quo. I'm not energized when I hear him speak, read his record, listen to him debate, nor study his biography.

Would it be better to have a weak, moderate democrat in 04? Or a few more years of extremism that fuels the fire of true revolt - not quasi-discomforted irritation with the system that allows a Kerry to be nominated, even elected, but not change.

Its been nice getting to know him, but I really don't want to know any more - he hasn't challenged the system in the past, and he hasn't challenged me now. I could easily sit this election out if he is the Dem's choice.

Just a thought

edit - typo

[dorktv]

1. Interesting.

[iamjoy]

5. 2004 Election

I wish we had the luxury of waiting a few more years to get a true choice, a true difference in office.

THE SUPREME COURT

We do not have the luxury of waiting. If we do not get a Dem in the White House this year, or make significant gains in Congress...game over - on so many issues.

[Edge]

2. Maybe if he picked Clark as his VP...

would you feel better?

And get your ass out to vote.

ABB 2004.

[blm]

3. This part doesn't ring true...."he hasn't challenged the system"

You said you 'studied' his bio and his record. How did you reach your conclusion?

He was the FIRST Senator to submit anti-discrimination of gays legislation in 1985. He advocated for gays to serve openly in the military.

He spearheaded the investigations of BCCI, Iran Contra and uncovered the CIA drugrunning operation. That's the exposure of MORE government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history. Status quo? Hardly

Exposing government corruption to that degree just doesn't excite you?

[Octafish]

12. Yeh. That sentence jumped out for me, too. Remember: BCCI ties to 9-11.

Here's what that part of the Kerry record is about. It's what Rove fears. It may put him and the rest of the BFEE in Leavenworth for the rest of their natural days -- the lucky ones, anyway.



THE BUSH-SAUDI CONNECTION

EXCERPT...

Jihad

The Wahhabi Taliban in Afghanistan had the blessings of the Saudi royal family and of The Big Three--the bin Laden family, the al Ahmoudi family, and the Mahfouz family--the richest clans in that medieval kingdom. (A C.I.A. official testified to Congress that Khalid bin Mahfouz is bin Laden’s brother-in-law). The desert oligarchs profited from world-wide investments as well as sleazy banking schemes such as the infamous Bank of Credit and Commerce International.

Salem bin Laden, Osama’s brother, has conducted all his American affairs through James Bath, a Houston crony of the Bush family. Bath’s former business partner Bill White testified in court that Bath had been a liaison for the C.I.A. In 1979 Bath invested $50,000 in Arbusto, George W. Bush’s first business venture. Rumor had it that Bath was acting as Salem bin Laden’s representative. "In conflicting statements, Bush at first denied ever knowing Bath, then acknowledged his stake in Arbusto and that he was aware Bath represented Saudi interests." (4)

In addition to doing aviation business with Saudi sheiks, Bath was part owner of a Houston bank whose chief stockholder was Ghaith Pharaon, who represented the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI), a criminal global bank with branches in 73 countries. BCCI proceeded to defraud depositors of $10 billion during the ‘80s, while providing a money laundry conduit for the Medellin drug cartel, Asia’s major heroin cartel, Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, the C.I.A., and Islamist terrorist organizations worldwide. (5)

Big Three wheeler-dealer Khalid bin Mahfouz, one of the largest stockholders in the criminal bank, was indicted when the massive BCCI banking scandal blew apart in the early 1990s. The Saudi royal family placed him under house arrest after discovering that Mahfouz had used the royal bank to channel millions of dollars through fake charities into bin Laden’s organizations, but Mahfouz was not so much punished as inconvenienced. (6)

CONTINUED...

http://www.hermes-press.com/BushSaud.htm

EDIT: Took out two graphs that somehow got in there somehow.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

14. Note the date

1985

[Old and In the Way]

24. Hey blm, the poster didn't mean "studied" study.

The person meant, "studied" as in read a bunch of Kerry misinformation posts on DU.

Nobody scares Bush like a John Kerry administration with a Democratic majority to control investigations. Then the real fun will begin.

[DrFunkenstein]

4. What About The Kerry-Wellstone "Clean Elections" Bill?

That was the first major campaign finance reform bill to get major attention, and was the blueprint for the watered-down McCain-Feingold.

Have you read this passage:

Suddenly, Kerry's theories didn't seem so far-fetched. He hoped this would be his moment to help lead the investigation into this extraordinary episode. The Iran-contra scandal was the top story in town, and there was worried talk in the halls of Congress that the United States might suffer another failed presidency.

But when congressional leaders chose the members of the elite Iran-contra committee, Kerry was left off. Those selected were consensus-politicians, not bomb-throwers.

The feeling among a disappointed Kerry and his staff was that the committee members were chosen to put a lid on things. "He was told early on they were not going to put him on it," Winer recalls. "He was too junior and too controversial . . .. They were concerned about the survival of the republic."

Even some Democrats "thought John was a little hotter than they would like," says Rosenblith.

As a consolation prize, the Democratic leadership gave Kerry chairmanship of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Operations and a charter to dig into the contra-drug connection. While disappointed, Kerry stuck with his investigation and the subcommittee published a report in 1989 that concluded the CIA and other US agencies had turned a blind eye to drug trafficking occurring on the fringes of the contra network. In many cases, traffickers were using the same airplanes, airfields, and other resources that the contras were using.

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/062003.shtml

[Virgil]

17. Just some links

Here is the Kerry Report- http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/18/thread18302.shtml

The http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/ARCHIVE/KERRY.html

One of the best places to read on the CIA and drugs is here- http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciadrugs/index.html

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

6. The "system"??

How do you define the "system"?

Oh, that's right. The "system" is the "status quo".

Brilliant.

[blm]

7. I'm still puzzled with the use of the word "learned"

it just strikes me as misused.

[mitchum]

9. LOL!

YOU"RE a funny one!

[AVID]

13. brilliant, I'm not - just a voter trying to decide

you are correct, though, I used broad statements.

To be more specific, challenge the Bush System. And the status quo I'm referring to is, again the bush admin. guess I am still, 16 mos later reeling from the vote to authorize war.

[blm]

16. There's no time to "reel"...this is a life and death battle towards Nov.

Here...if you STUDIED Kerry's record, maybe you missed this. Feel better. Kerry was only being muted by the media. He was going after Bush long before Dean. And substantively. The media gave Dean the mic and the stage to drown out Kerry who was TOO damaging to Bush.


Kerry Shows Courage In Challenging Bush
Thursday, August 8, 2002 By: Joe Conason

New York Observer

>>>>>
But it was John Kerry who delivered the most interesting, substantive and challenging message. His subject was George W. Bush's shortcomings as a world leader.The New York Times reported that Mr. Kerry "offered a long attack on Mr. Bush's foreign policy," although the paper gave short shrift to the details in the Senator''s speech. What he began to articulate was a Democratic critique of this administration''s blunt and myopic unilateralism, and a vision that restores international alliances to the center of American diplomacy.

He agrees with the objective of removing Saddam Hussein, but objected to the vague plans for what will replace the Iraqi dictatorship. He called the latest arms treaty with Russia a "cosmetic" one that inadequately safeguards decommissioned weapons. He denounced the "Cold War" approach to North Korea that has undone the progress achieved by the Clinton administration. He expressed scorn for the administration''s disengagement from the Middle East crisis before Sept. 11.
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>
There is, however, at least one benefit for Mr. Kerry in speaking out on those faraway places and problems. While his rivals sound as if they''re campaigning for the offices they already occupy, he sounds as if he is running for President.

In a sense, Mr. Kerry enjoys an unfair advantage that mitigates the burden of his home state. He''s a decorated Vietnam veteran whose Navy service may help shield him from attacks on his patriotism. Throughout his years in the Senate, that credential has allowed him to investigate and criticize disturbing excesses of American policy abroad, as he did when he probed U.S. aid to the contra gangsters in Nicaragua. (That rather lonely crusade made him a target of the notorious Arkansas Project, funded by Republican billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife to bring down President Clinton.)

Whether Mr. Kerry can engage the electorate in a discussion of America''s global responsibilities is far from certain. His own dispassionate style may hinder him. Yet he deserves great credit for reclaiming international leadership for his party when others cannot or will not.
>>>>>>>>>>>


And here is Mr. Excitement at that same time propping up Bush's leadership after being shown clips of Kerry attacking Bush.

 MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe the military operation in Afghanistan has been successful?
       
       GOV. DEAN: Yes, I do, and I support the president in that military operation.
       
       MR. RUSSERT: The battle of Tora Bora was successful?
       
       GOV. DEAN: I’ve seen others criticize the president. I think it’s very easy to second-guess the
       commander-in-chief at a time of war. I don’t choose to engage in doing that.

[regnaD kciN]

27. Note the date...

8/8/02 -- more than two months before Kerry's IWR blank-check vote. A lot of eyes were opened on that day.

Words are cheap (as has been proven by Kerry's contorted "now I'm for it, now I never was" spin on why his vote didn't really mean what it meant, carried on from the minute the vote was cast until now). It's actions that reveal character, and show Kerry's to be dubious at best.

:argh:

[blm]

34. Nope. If IWR was implemented properly there would be no war.

However I do understand that some NEED to blame Dem candidates instead of Bush.

[loupe-garou]

8. I was just at a speech by R F Kennedy Jr about the environment

and he was talking about how the Bushies are basically removing all the environmental laws they can and ignoriing most of the others. RFK has 3 children with asthma, and he spoke about it as an epidemic.

Not to mention global warming and the melting of the ice caps!!!! Patriot Act 2,3 and 4, more conservative judges, more poor and unemployed!

RFK was asked what we could do, and he said most important- get involved in this election, work for someone.......He then spoke about John Kerry as a friend of his and someone who really cares about the environment- and in his opinion the best man for the job, though he said he liked all the candidates......But the gist was this is serious and they must be stopped NOW!! AM I RANTING???!!:kick:

[blm]

10. Nope. You sound great.

Stream of consciousness posting is my favorite. heh

Welcome...glad you're here.

[redqueen]

38. No, you're not ranting.

I'm glad you pointed that out. I've heard RFK speak about the environment, and take his opinion seriously.

Thanks, makes me feel better about voting for JK in 9 months. :)

Oh yeah... and Welcome to DU! :hi:

[seventhson]

46. If RFKJr. thinks he is the best, Welllll......

This creates a clear conflict for me...


I feel I pretty much MUST vote against Bush and for someone who can beat him no matter what...

On the other hand I honestly BELIEVE that Kerry's skull brothers were involved in the murders of both JFK and RFK.

dilemma

Either the Kennedy's are blind to connections, unaware of them, or they are willfully part of a loyal opposition which can overlook the complicity of those among its ranks in order to defeat the greater evil.

It is clear that I must join ranks against the greater evil.

But until that is required I am 100% firmly opposed to Kerry and Clark and must support Dean, Edwards and Kucinich against them.

I have pondered the question raised by the original poster here for some time. But is it worth it to have a wholesale slaughter of innocents under four more years of Bush (and a cost to the global environment politically and socially and naturally which may prove fatatl)?

It is not.

[Catch22Dem]

11. Wait a cotton pickin' minute

"he hasn't challenged the system in the past"

The highly decorated combat vet and Naval officer who came home to the US of A and formed the Vietnam Veterans Against the Vietnam War has never challenged the system? Uh......

[blm]

15. I can name 3 GOP presidents who WISH Kerry hadn't challenged them

Nixon, Reagan and Bush. Bush2 is NEXT.

I am amazed at the level of ignorance about Kerry's place in the history books.

[noahmijo]

20. Because of Kerry I am going to register as a Democrat

I wanted to start a new thread to sort out of shout my political coming out of the closet so to speak but because of DU's rules this will have to do.

I'm currently a registered Libertarian who basically used to hold pretty Conservative beliefs. We're talking I listened to Micheal Savage and Rush everyday for the last 2 years.

Although I agreed with alot of what they had to say and saw the logic as time went on and I just got sick and tired of their miserable complaining especially Savage.

A little background on me I'm 22 years old and I'm a semester away from graduating with a BS in Business Admin with a major in MIS. Since I spent my early childhood in the Bronx just like Savage I listened to him for his hilarious stories about growing up there and to the possible dismay of some of you hard core leftists on here he is actually fun to listen to when he's not bitching about liberals if you're from the east coast. Some of you may disagree, but hey that's just me.

Well to put this as shortly as possible, I always thought of the Democrats like most other conservatives you know radical communist left wing anti-business anti-American ect. I thought the Democrat party was a party of kooks and no longer the party of JFK.

But at the same time being half Mexican and living with Chinese-Filipina girl, I don't exactly blend in with the mostly white conservative agenda.

I took some time to think and realized some areas where I do not fit in with the conservative agenda:

I am NOT pro-life and I'm tired of other conservatives trying to make me feel guilty by pointing out that I can't be Catholic and pro-life.

WRONG I can be Catholic and not demand that my government force my views or the views of my religion on others.

I don't believe in free handouts but I do believe in assisting those who truly need it or those who are truly trying. After deeply studying hardcore Capitalism and economics I now have come to the belief that a strong nation is one that takes care of itself and helps those who are less fortunate.

This is NOT a call for Socialism. I have browsed this site from time to time and have seem some of the most vile hated filled pro socialist statements and I see such types as being just as offensive as any radical conservative I've ever encountered. I also have no use for you types that think it's cool to burn the American flag in protest. I don't think it should be illegal, but to me you're as low as a cockroach if you'd do something like that and I simply wouldn't give you a shred of respect.

Also those who compare Bush to Hitler: Yea Bush is a total failure and he should be thrown out by his ass back to Crawford. But those of us who know some history and who have families and relatives that fought and died under Hitler are quite offended that you'd trivialize the murder of millions of Jews, Poles, and Gypsies. Hey Bush is bad but he never ran any extermination camps okay?

As John Kerry says I simply feel that Capitalism and Democracy can go hand in hand meaning we all have the right to prosper and bask in our freedoms yet if we have much to spare we should be obligated to help the less fortunate.

Conservatives call themselves capitalist leaning. They couldn't be further from being Capitalist despite what many of you hard core left leaners on here may think. They are simply a different breed of socialism which lies on different principles than yourselves. Everytime I hear a Conservative preach about how great capitalism is but in the same breath praise Bush's economic policies I just have to laugh.

My own view on Capitalism used to be that it was the closet thing to a moral system. The truth is it's a great system that should be used as a tool but NOT as a way of life. It is a tool that has brought millions of Americans prosperity but when left unchecked may bring others poverty and denial of the American Dream.

Hence I believe in the idea of truly mixing Capitalism with Democracy in the sense that we encourage businesses to boom and jobs to be filled, yet at the same time hang every benedict arnold CEO that exploits workers and basically stabs those who helped build their corporations in the back.

Aside from the remaining kooks in the Democrat party such as Sharpton and Byrd and to a great extend Hillary, I see this party apparently moving away from the radical left and in the embrace of these old JFK ideals I'm talking about.

But the truth is I just feel such disappointment in Bush's performance.

You people think YOU'RE upset about Bush's performance thus far? you have no idea the anger and betrayal those of us who voted for him, who thought he'd never turn right wing-socialist on us the contempt we feel for him and truthfully as much as I hate Hillary I think I'd be willing to plant her in there instead of Bush.

Thankfully though it looks like this November I may be casting a vote for Kerry to unseat Bush.

The support of John Kerry is what's evidencing this for me and overall this seems to be the direction of the Democrat Party.

To a certain extent I learned the value of true compassion and true patriotism. Although I may not agree with everyting on the liberal/democrat agenda the differences aren't enough to make me crawl back to the Repug or Libertarian party. I value our environment, but don't think taxing Americans to death is the answer. I prefer Kerry's initiative for this topic. I completely despise the idea of our jobs being outsourced to India which Bush hasn't done ANYTHING to stop not even spoken of it. Instead he's going on and on about terror this and terror that, I wonder when he's going to tell the Saudis to go screw themselves the way Giuliani (the only Republican left that I have any respect for) did.

Anyways I got a long laundery list of reasons why I hate Bush and want him gone. The Iraq War is one of them (I supported the Iraq war but NOT the way he want about going at it)

Parts of me that remain Libertarian I suppose is that I still believe in finding better ways to solve our economic problems besides raising taxes and I am a firm supporter of the 2nd Amendment. I fully agree with Kerry's tax rollback initiative however, but I'm not a fan of the old "just tax and spend" method.

I'm most likely the only "liberal" minded person who cares about the environment and loves animals (but is not anti-meat and anti-hunting) that you'll ever talk to that packs a 44 Magnum Desert Eagle :o) but I have no real complaints about the Democrat's rather stricter gun policy as I am not a law breaker and I can live with having to have a background check before I make a purchase at a gun show.

As far as this whole gay marriage thing goes, I could care less it doesn't concern me. Let the homosexuals have their little marriages and tax breaks it doesn't bother me. However, they better not demand that any church gives them a marriage by a priest or any religious figure because to me that's when the line is crossed. From what I understand though they're not aiming to do that though so no concerns there.

From a realistic point of view, I think it's kind of a mistake to stick their heads out like this and demand this gay marriage initiative because it's just another reason for bigots and the like to hate them, but at the same time this is America, I love the freedoms we all have, and I also love the fact that this act will certainly piss off the radical terrorists from countries like Iran who barely even allow straight marriages to occur.

Overall though, I'm more worried about our huge deficit than a couple of lesbians who want some tax breaks.

So I guess ultimately I'm a "Libertarian Leaning Liberal" who is proud to join the ranks of real patriots and real Americans whether you're kooky, gay, or a metalhead like me.

[woofless]

21. Welcome to DU noahmijo

and thank you for one of the best and most thoughtful initial posts I have read here. A little tip to avoid flames, we here are Democrats and we belong to the Democratic Party. Freepers routinely refer to the Party as the Democrat Party and to do so however unconciously will open you up to criticism you will think is unwarranted. Welcome Friend.

Woof

[Old and In the Way]

25. Whoa...nice 1st post!

I think you said more intelligent things in your initial post than I accummulated in my 1st 1000.

I think you'll find lots of like-minded people here....welcome aboard noahmijo!

[redqueen]

39. Hi noahmijo!

What an amazing first post! :wow:

Thanks for your candor! I love when people have the courage to voice and defend their views / values, esp. when they're not the 'popular' ones. :) That's what democracy's all about, right?

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

52. This post does deserve its own thread

And as a 45 year old Jewish lesbian, I wholeheartedly appreciate your views on both matters.

Welcome to DU and please know...if you are only 22, I already feel a bit better about the future than I did when I awoke this morning.

[noahmijo]

56. Wow what a welcome thanks everyone!

Well due to school and stuff I have to post rather sporatically and not in as much detail as I wish I could.

Thank you all for the warm welcome, I had alot more to say, but I had to cut it short before my girlfriend would get annoyed and cut mine short for not going to bed on time ;o) (we have to wake up at 5 am everyday to get to school on time)

Anyways basically yea you all are talking to a guy who followed and carefully studied the conservo-libertarian type movement and never once engaged in real conversation with other liberals outside of a classroom debate.

I feel the difference between me and most "home grown liberals" if you will, is that I understand why alot of conservatives think the way they do and why especially Libertarians still hold they beliefs they hold. Believe it or not alot of them were like me just completely misled and not shown the other side of the coin.

Of course there's no accounting for radical conservatives anymore than there is for radical leftists as I stated before I really have no use for either kind.

As far as my views on Kerry, I know many will disagree, that's fine, the truth is everyone has their own interests at heart and I'm no different in that respect. Being interested in technology and business I happen to like his optimistic views on how capitalism and technology could be harnassed to make this country better and more powerful (in the good we can help everyone sense) and being a young idealist I'd be proud to take part in that movement. My girlfriend desires to be a teacher, so Kerry's i itiative to reward teachers more handsomely is of course very intriguing to the both of us.


He makes economic sense to me, and although his moral beliefs may not be liberal enough for some, you have to give him credit that he's willing to allow democracy to control moral decisions and not the government.

Edwards would be my second choice.

One thing I've noticed about you Democrats that I gotta say is very commendable, you stick together. When I was a young Republican I noticed that about the party. Nobody ever stuck together. It was always "he ain't Conservative enough cause he's pro-abortion or pro-gay" there was always too much mudslinging within the party. Now I know Democrats will bicker and debate one another but in the end you guys all come together and support the chosen guy as the "Anybody But Bush" movement shows. It just seems like you're more of a family that looks out for one another and supports your candidates and eachother. I could be wrong but that's just an impression I get having been on the other side before and observing this. I caught a thread while browsing through here where somebody was reminding everyone that regardless who the nominee is we should all stand behind that person in order to get rid of Bush. I couldn't agree more.

I can't tell you what it feels to finally ditch the phony-patriotic Conservative movement and feel at home here other liberals who I may or may not always agree with me on everything (I'm probably still a bit more capitalist in some respects than most liberals, but I despise the conservative idea of capitalism), but at least there's a principal goal involved. Conservatives complain alot about how Democrats tax the crap out of everyone and give it to the schools and the poverty stricken and the welfare class essentially. Well I'd rather it go to some struggling family or a poor school than to Mars or to some Benedict Arnold corporation that has offshore accounts in Haiti in order to avoid paying taxes. Large companies do not need corporate welfare that's something I've always opposed which Conservatives tend to support. Whenever I would bring up the subject of corporate welfare in a conservative style setting whether on a forumn or a chat I'd get the mean looking blank stares as if I wanted to betray the honest American businessman or something.

As far as Libertarians go, I do hold sympathy for many of their views, but the issue with them is they pay too close attention to the numbers issue than they do of real life application.

Example, the truth is Bush's tax cuts for the rich are giving the economy a significant boost. Do the math and you'll see a growing GDP which is how the economy is measured. The upper class pay I believe over 90% of this country's taxes therefore go by the numbers, it's only logical to give them the tax cut.

But then you see the unemployment, the job losses, the outsourcing of jobs to other countries, the greedy CEO's who screw thousands of workers over just so their stocks can go up an extra point, the thousands who can't afford healthcare.

I happen to love this country, and I believe its citizens deserve better, and I believe that the well being and education of people is important. In the long run it's best for all of us. I like the Nash equilibrium approach in a way. Do what's best for you and everyone else.

Essentially say you could make $20 by helping only yourself or you could make $10 by just helping everyone else and not worrying about yourself.

I prefer the help yourself and be gracious to others and make $15 and this way you're happy, everyone else is better off, and in the long run it means more respect and profits.

This is the logic I like for our educational system and our economy as a whole. Encourage more graduations more college degrees, that means more people land better jobs, income rises, which means demand and supply rises which means everyone wins. It's more profitable for everyone.

This is the approach I see in the Democrat Party overall. Of course there are few if not many who would disagree or dislike this logic, but hey there's just as much if not more from the other side of the political aisle that would disagree and/or probably call me a socialist, but yet support corporate welfare in the same sentence.

THAT'S the kind of Capitalism I like.

Well I must go cook, I'd invite you all over for some of my homeade burritos, salsa, guacomole, rice, and quesadias, but I'm afraid my kitchen's not big enough to accomodate all of you.

So since I'm still stuck in the 80's I'm gonna say keep on rockin, don't give up the good fight, we will reclaim our country and make is prosperous again, and the true patriots of this nation will make their voices heard.

~N~

[Samantha]

18. Here's another thought for you

I came home tonight to hear the last of Kerry's interview about his position on the ruling in Massachusetts and gay marriages. Kerry looked into the camera and uttered words to the effect it would be a mistake for Bush* (Rove) to try to make this an issue in this election season because his (Kerry's) position was exactly the same as Cheney's.

The inference was clear. Kerry was sending a message that if Karl Rove attempts to split the Dems over the gay marriage issue, Cheney's daughter is fair game. This instantly reminded me of Rove sayng "Wilson's wife is fair game."

I have had many problems with Kerry's political foot-in-the-mouth disease for some time now. There is no way I will ever allow this man to speak for me. If he becomes the Democratic party's nominee, I will be registering as an Independent.

[KC21304]

19. You are entitled to your interpretation of what Kerry meant,

but sometime a cigar is just a cigar, as they say. He was very clear. If he is the nominee he will be arguing his positions with the Republican ticket. Bush is with his wing nut friends on this issue but Cheney is more moderate. Kerry is saying he and Cheney agree. Why bring Cheney's daughter into it ?

[regnaD kciN]

28. I suspect the same is true here...

If he becomes the Democratic party's nominee, I will be registering as an Independent.

Although I would likely vote for Kerry in November anyway (Bush is, after all, the greater of two evils), his nomination would tell me that the Democratic Party is beyond redemption, and not a place where I can be a faithful member.

:-(

[edzontar]

35. You and me both. I became a Dem because of Nixon.....

And will leave (in terms of registration) because of Kerry.

Kerry's nomination and defeat will mark the demise of the party in any case, I fear.

[seaglass]

37. That's ok. Even in liberal MA we have more Independents

(unenrolled) than Democrats.

[redqueen]

40. I don't know what he meant

but even if he meant what you think, I think it's fine. He's playing hardball. This ain't the bush leagues, however much bush wishes it were! ;)

[D G]

22. "a few more years of extremism that fuels the fire of true revolt"

How many more people are you willing to have lose their jobs, lose their homes, get sick without health insurance and die (in the U.S. and in Iraq - and dead Iraqis as well) under Bush's "extremism" in order to fuel these fires of "true" revolt?

Seriously. I want a number.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

23. I have no doubt that Kerry will change your mind.

He's gonna be a great President.

[regnaD kciN]

29. On the contrary...

...remember, I was a Kerry supporter from long back (i.e. his days in the VVAW) until 10/11/2002.

Since then, the more I learn about him, the less I like.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

26. The more I read this forum, the more I am clear on what people really want

They want to be freed from the totalitarianism of the right so that we may all finally get to experience the joys of the totalitarianism from the left.
They wish to be freed from the chains of international commerce so that rather than share economic expansion with the world as we all selfishly enjoyed under Clinton, we can all sink with the world.

They wish to make sure that we get all the politicians that have any experience at all out of Wahington, so that we may be left with neophyte reformers just like the reformers that came in in 96 under New Gingrich only this time instead of a republican coup, we can have THEIR coup.

Now for a few facts about John Kerry who hasn't really stood up in the past allow me to cut and paste:

I must say I have never considered Kerry's votes on IWR or the Patriot Act purely political. Some people feel that way, I don't.

Re: The Patriot Act, it filled gaps that FISA left open and if you recall FISA warrants had been issued against one of the 9/11 suspects and a federal judge had rejected them in the past. The act itself is wrong and there are many problems with it but that is exactly why provisions were written in for the act to sunset.

Re: IWR - Kerry's position changed on IWR after a closed door meeting as did many senators and congresspeople including one of my own. There is an LBN thread detailing more info about OSP and how these agenst were pressured to accept evidence that was debunked and give it credence. IF these agents had previously testified credibly before Kerry (and odds are they did given he served on the Intelligence Committee for 18 years and some were senior agents) then it is entirely conceivable that he had to weigh their previous credibility against conflicting information and their current statements. He called it wrong. To people who expect him to explain more, it was a closed door meeting and he would be committing a federal crime to explain himself further.

To my knowledge, the only other times he gave his vote for military action were Bosnia and Somalia in his entire career. He did NOT vote for Gulf war 1.

Kerry's position on gay marriage is identical to Dean's. He supports civil unions and has MANY strong statements on the record rejecting bigotry against gay people.

For being an opportunist, he has a history of ferreting out government corruption. He almost ruined his career when investigating BCCI as a close friend of Carter's (Clark Clifford) became implicated. Clifford, it turns out had NOT committed a crime but he was persona non grata with high level Dems for Clifford even being referenced in the investigation

He only backed off from that investigation after Clinton ordered it dropped and there was no where else to go.

The two convicted felons in George Bush's administration, Elliot Abrahams and Otto Reich were convicted based on Kerry's investigative work which was then used by the special prosecutor in Iran Contra and Senator Inouye at the hearings to to indict them. It was HIS work that got those hearings accomplished and George Bush Sr's pardons that undermined further convictions as well as Bill Clinton's lack of political will to follow through.

His environmental record is better than most in the senate.

He pushed HARD for Kyoto (dropped unilaterally by the Bush admin) which would have resulted in less manufacturing jobs being shipped abroad since there in now no incentive for other countries to pass anti-pollution laws.


He has enforced (and written) tough banking laws onshore and offshore, which laws if not abandoned by the Bush admin would have made it far easier to trace laundered money in drugs, terrorism AND corporate crime...hardly the act of a corporate apologist.


And finally, I am 45 years old and for nearly ALL of my adult life John Kerry has been on the side of the issue with his votes that I value most...be it labor rights, women's rights, clean air, clean water, or darn near any other issue.

I further feel that his extensive knowledge of security matters and his long standing relatinship with the senate and congress will lead to greater cooperation to clean up the mess from this administration.

His plan on Iraq is not all that far apart from Dean..he is NOT for expanding the mission but for turning it over to the UN.

John Kerry is NOT at the mercy of oil companies.

He favors alternative energy sources.

I could go on but you probably won't read all of this anyway.

[blm]

33. Your post deserves its own thread.

.

[RichM]

45. A good post - but it reflects the skill of the poster more than the merit

of the candidate.

A significant phrase appears in the discussion of the Clifford-BCCI brouhaha: "He only backed off from that investigation after Clinton ordered it dropped and there was no where else to go." The problem with Kerry has never been that he doesn't know about the dark side of the US government. It's that he backs off when pressure is applied, & doesn't carry these fights to the finish.

There's no doubt that he has an "extensive knowledge of security matters," etc. And you're right that he's not that far from Dean on Iraq. There is little that separates the positions of the "major" 4 candidates - they all support the occupation and want it to be a "success." Only DK is different.

If Kerry is not "at the mercy of oil companies," why won't he say something like this in public: "One of the main motivations for the Iraq invasion was to seize control of its oil. Another was to convert the country to a US client state & military base." I won't hold my breath waiting for Kerry to say something like that.

As for the justification of the IWR vote: it mainly proves that a skillful argument can be adduced to rationalize almost anything. The argument is very nice, but relies on wobbly phrases like "it is entirely conceivable that..." The argument wisely stays away from the points that most need examination: that the vote gave Bush exactly what he wanted; & that subsequently, Kerry completely caved in to the framing of the issue as "Iraq's WMD" and "Saddam is evil and a threat," as opposed to "Iraq's oil" and "Let's build military bases all over Iraq."

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

49. Again, the facts on BCCI are available to anyone with an open mind

He was a junior senator at the time. I appreciate your challenge of the status quo and believe it has its place but to dismiss his efforts in this matter is to reveal your own bias. There were probably more convictions of officials in the Bush 1 presidency than any other presidency (save for Reagan) Those convictions came out of Kerry's work. It's more than a simple twist of fate that key players were pardoned. Are you gonna lay that at Kerry's feet as well?

Your second paragraph I am in complete agreement with. It's HIGH time the word PEACE was in any publication at the DOD other than the name of a missle (peacekeeper).

Actually the big issue in the Middle East and the one that other nations care more about than oil is water. Oil was the icing on the cake for this war. The Tigres/Euphrates river running through the nation probably had more to do with long term goals for domination in the region than anything.

As to yor final paragraph...fair enough but we can probably both admit we don't know for sure.

You justify forms of government all the time that have failed miserably...

[IndianaGreen]

30. Wait until you hear all of the Boston stories about Kerry!

Like the ones I heard from Howard Carr of the Boston Herald, who was just on Faux. His description of Kerry is right out of the 1950 classic dark comedy Sunset Boulevard, with Teresa Heinz cast in the role of Norma Desmond (played by Gloria Swanson), while Kerry is Joe Gillis (played by William Holden).

This is the sort of stuff that today's TV audiences will just eat up!

Add to that endless video clips of Kerry waffling on every conceivable issue, together with his cozy relationship with corporate America, and you have the makings of an electoral disaster.

To add more to the drama, imagine the Kerry coronation in Boston being picketed by antiwar demonstrators. Yummy! :9

Don't blame the Left, we told everyone that Kerry was unelectable, but some people preferred to listen to Kerry's masters in the DLC than to listen to the grassroots.

[aldian159]

31. Wow, a sunset blvd. allusion on DU.

One of the best movies ever, up there with the Manchurian Candidate.

[KC21304]

47. Movie analogies, Fox, and Howard Carr all in one.

That really got my attention too. Kerry is going down. LOL

[loupe-garou]

32. No matter who the nominee is they will have to meet the repug

spin machine, and from what I've seen so far, Kerry is probably best equipped to deal with it, in fact he relishes the opportunity.

I think something like Dean's draft deferment and subsequent skiing trip would be harder to explain..

About the gay marriage-Cheney quote-he wasn't bragging about agreeing with Cheney, he was saying that the issue was already neutralized by that fact.

It sometimes seems to me that we here are tearing apart our own candidates in a way that should be reserved for the repugs.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

50. Right...note his unabashed refusal to vote for Gulf War 1

[stickdog]

36. I've learned more about the corporate media than I've learned about Kerry.

I've learned there are front-runners and then there are front-runners.

One gets the hatchet job while the other gets the coronation march.

[blm]

43. hahaha...where were you most of last year?

You excused the media every step of the way as long as your guy benefitted from Kerry being shut down.

[stickdog]

48. Dean had the money. Dean had the excitement. Dean had the support.

The media was forced to report on this, so they oversold the story, set Dean up for a big fall and then fell on him.

What I want to know is -- why isn't anyone attacking Kerry now?

I mean, Rove wants Dean according to you, right? So why did Rove let the Club for Growth run anti-Dean ads? Why haven't Rove or any of his media disciples done anything to prop up Dean or hurt Kerry?

[blm]

54. HAHA. Too bad that money and energy didn't go to DK where it belonged.

You know...the REAL antiwar liberal who so many here shunned in favor of a career centrist and corporatist who coopted the language of internet message boards.

[KC21304]

55. But the media are attacking Kerry.

Haven't you heard ? Fox, Howard Carr, the Boston Herald ? And it is going to be ferocious. Next the are going to say he is too much like Charles Boyer. You know, that French movie star. Oh, the drama of it all.

The only chance for Dean now is to change his name to Kerry, Clark or Edwards, because he is behind them in Wisconsin.

[redqueen]

42. I haven't enjoyed it at all.

I've been all over the map about Kerry -- happy, not so happy, outright disgusted, etc. etc. etc...

But it doesn't matter. Whatever this man has done in the past absolutely cannot and must not matter to us now (well, by now I mean after the convention, if and when he wins).

At that point, it is all about beating bush. And despite my misgivings I'll be able to campaign enthusiastically for him, because my children are depending on me to ensure that the Supreme Court does not turn against them under another bushista administration.

So, I'm not going to brood about how things won't change enough or how bad things might get if he's elected. Okay, I probably will, but only on my bad days. (mea culpa) :)

If he's the nominee, so be it. Regardless of any doubts I may have, I'm going to work my ass off for this man to get him elected. And after he is, I'm going to give him a freaking chance. I'm not psychic so I don't know what he may or may not do, therefore I intend to support him until he gives me a reason not to.

I don't support him now, but if he's the nominee, you bet your liberal ASS I will!

[LuminousX]

44. Of all the things you learned about Kerry - do you know

Was Kerry PRO-Iraq War or ANTI-Iraq War?

[TheDonkey]

51. Wasn't Kerry on Nixon's "list" he must be doing something GOOD

[redqueen]

53. LOL - no kidding!

He should wear that on a label as a badge of pride!