I think referring to CBS commentators as senile is insulting.
But schmuck and dreck are OK?
Why the double standard?
Isn't the President of the US entitled to the same measure of respect you think should be afforded an unethical journalist, if not more?
Interested in your response.
You might wish to this compilation of Kerry's stance on Iraq. It should convince you and anyone who has an open mind that Kerry's Iraq position is undefined and completely unknowable. He does not know what he intends to do, all assertions that he has one fixed plan, one fixed position notwithstanding.
He might follow the Bush line, he might not.
He might pull out in 6 months, he might not.
He may think it's the right war, he may not.
He might increase funding, he may not.
Unless you are absolutely sure that anyone is better than Bush, i.e., you are making an emotional/hormonal decision based on things such as Bush's alleged lack of IQ, way the pronounces nuclear, because he's a Texan, because he is cocky and you don't like assertive men, or you like the fact that Kerry has good hair, etc., how in good conscience can you vote for someone whose position on the big issue of the day is impossible to discern?
images.radcity.net
If your decision is based on the emotional factors I've outlined, fine. It's your right to do so. But please don't tell me that you have studied the Iraq situation and, based on considered and studious inquiry, you know what Kerry will do in Iraq because, unless you're his mother and he has been sending secret messages to you, no one knows Kerry's postion, including Kerry. |
