Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (5164)	3/5/2004 7:03:54 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 81568

LOL! I see you have bought into the whole pinhead smear on Bush.... Kerry has no spine. That is obvious.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (5164)	3/5/2004 7:50:42 AM
From: lorne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Kerry: Federal government should recognize state-sanctioned same-sex 'marriage' Mar 4, 2004 bpnews.net BOSTON (BP)--Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has told homosexual activists that the federal government should recognize same-sex “marriages” and civil unions that are legalized on the state level, The Washington Post reported March 4. His position means that the federal government would grant the same 1,000-plus benefits enjoyed by married couples nationwide to same-sex couples -- provided that those couples lives in a state that allows for same-sex “marriage” or civil unions. Kerry made the pledge at a homosexual fundraiser in San Francisco Feb. 27, the newspaper reported, adding that it is the furthest Kerry has gone in defining his position on same-sex “marriage.” “[H]e would bestow all federal benefits such as the right to file joint income taxes and collect survivor benefits to same-sex couples who unite legally in civil unions, domestic partnerships and even marriage under their state laws,” The Post reported. Kerry, who says he personally opposes same-sex “marriage,” has been criticized by homosexual activists for supporting a marriage amendment to the Massachusetts constitution that would ban same-sex “marriage” while legalizing civil unions. He opposes a federal marriage amendment and was one of only 14 senators in 1996 to vote against the Defense of Marriage Act. Kerry’s comments at the fundraiser were meant to appease homosexual activists, The Post said. Kerry is trying to find “middle ground” on same-sex “marriage,” his advisers told the newspaper. "There were a lot of people who were very upset at the way his position was described," Jeff Soukup, a Kerry supporter who is a homosexual, told The Post. “And there were a lot of people who had been planning to attend the fundraiser who said they would not attend until Kerry clarified his position." California state Rep. Mark Leno, who has introduced a bill in California that would legalize same-sex “marriage,” was pleased with Kerry’s position. “It’s the first time in history that a presidential candidate has ever supported full and equal protection for same-sex couples," Leno told the newspaper. “He told me that he would grant all 1,049 federal rights to same-sex couples in whatever legal union their states recognize.” President Bush backed a constitutional marriage amendment Feb. 24, saying it may be the only way to stop nationalized same-sex “marriage.” “An amendment to the Constitution is never to be undertaken lightly,” Bush said at the time. “The amendment process has addressed many serious matters of national concern. And the preservation of marriage rises to this level of national importance.” --30— For more information on the debate over same-sex "marriage," visit BP's story collection at: bpnews.net

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (5164)	3/5/2004 8:15:31 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

The resolution Kerry voted for specifically allowed independent action on the part of the US. It did not say or imply that the president could only use force if the United Nations Security Council approved: (a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. (b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and (2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. Kerry voted to give Bush freedom to make the determination. Kerry tries to have it both ways - he voted for the war resolution, for the Patriot Act, for No Child Left Behind reform, for the 2002 tax cuts. After he decided to run for President, he realized a policy of supporting Pres. Bush wouldn't resonate with with Democrat primary voters so he cynicallly flip-flopped. You know this is obvious to any unbiased observer.