Kerry/Edwards=Cheap/Tawdry

[Guest]

Ami, ami, ami.

Scientists are discovering and documenting so many instances of homosexuality in the animal kingdom these days of course there are naturally occurring instances in humans.

I won't post a link to any research about this because you never cite sources when you post and the shock may just stop your heart.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I know it does no good to appeal to Amicus - from his posts, he clearly overestimates both his reasoning and his writing.

I would point out, however, that he posted about his own daughter and her political views in this forum, and even forwarded her the link to the thread. Any of his outrage about privacy should therefore be taken with a very large grain of salt.

The facts of this are that Mary Cheney is an open lesbian, owns property with her partner, wears a gold band on her left hand, appeared at the RNC in the VP's box (but not on stage) with her partner, and manages her father's campaign. Prior to that position, she coordinated gay outreach for Coors. She is not only openly gay, but also a professional gay advocate. The notion that Kerry's mention is somehow an invasion of privacy is ludicrous; Mary Cheney's professional life is wrapped up in both politics and her homosexuality.

Kerry was asked a direct question: Do you think homosexuality is a choice? In mentioning Mary Cheney, he did nothing that runs counter to her public life. Did it draw attention to Bush's cynical and hypocritical support of a Constitutional Amendment? Yes, indeed. Cheney himself disavowed that position in his one debate. Nevertheless, Mary Cheney is a campaign official, and a professional gay advocate, and Dick and Lynne's daughter.

There was certainly no lack of vocal condemnation from the Right of Alex Kerry when she wore the black dress without underwear at Cannes.

To me, it's a wonder that Mary Cheney hasn't resigned, given her parents' reaction to this non-issue, which can only be described as pitiful.

The Bush campaign is counting on their feigned outrage to turn decent people against Kerry, who was the voice of tolerance and compassion in his answer to the question. That some here have jumped to their pied piper's song is sad testament to the Machiavellian and cynical direction behind Bush's duplicitous campaign.

 

[cantdog]

Wow, Huckleman. Applause from me.

Shame, Eddie. There was no cheap shot intended. The easy meat at which the barb was thrust was the hypocrisy involved. But people have no sense of irony.

The verbatim transcript and the video record both suggest no such "cheap shot" interpretation. Meanwhile, Cheney's chagrin and his jaw move, which amicus noted, was quite understandable annoyance. After all, he had to reverse his position and disavow his ticket's support for the amendment. This is, technically, one of those flop things, isn't it? Not pleasant to have to do over again, before millions. The dems have not pointed a finger at the man's shift in a more humane direction, because Cheney himself has ceased to call people "flippers" when they grow the fuck up, and figure out they were mistaken.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Wow, Huckleman. Applause from me.

Shame, Eddie. There was no cheap shot intended. The easy meat at which the barb was thrust was the hypocrisy involved. But people have no sense of irony.

The verbatim transcript and the video record both suggest no such "cheap shot" interpretation. Meanwhile, Cheney's chagrin and his jaw move, which amicus noted, was quite understandable annoyance. After all, he had to reverse his position and disavow his ticket's support for the amendment. This is, technically, one of those flop things, isn't it? Not pleasant to have to do over again, before millions. The dems have not pointed a finger at the man's shift in a more humane direction, because Cheney himself has ceased to call people "flippers" when they grow the fuck up, and figure out they were mistaken.

I for one respect Teach. He is as vocal as anyone here about the evils of GWB and his administration. But he hasn't let his dislike of the GOP blind him to the faults of John Kerry.

It takes a man with a whole lot of conviction and integrity, to state he thinks his candidate acted inappropriately. Obviously, there is a wide divergence of opinion on this. No matter where you stand on it, I think everyone should be able to appreciate his honesty and his integrity, in saying what is unpopular.

I don't see any shame at all in being able to see the faults in your candidate and having the conviction to comment on them.

-Colly

 

[Edward Teach]

Wow, Huckleman. Applause from me.

Shame, Eddie. There was no cheap shot intended. The easy meat at which the barb was thrust was the hypocrisy involved. But people have no sense of irony.

The verbatim transcript and the video record both suggest no such "cheap shot" interpretation. Meanwhile, Cheney's chagrin and his jaw move, which amicus noted, was quite understandable annoyance. After all, he had to reverse his position and disavow his ticket's support for the amendment. This is, technically, one of those flop things, isn't it? Not pleasant to have to do over again, before millions. The dems have not pointed a finger at the man's shift in a more humane direction, because Cheney himself has ceased to call people "flippers" when they grow the fuck up, and figure out they were mistaken.

My opinion was based upon what actually /occurred/, not through any attempt to divine what Kerry /intended./

Any point that needed to be made about gay rights could have been made without bringing Mary Cheney into it. She was brought into it. Inserting her sexuality into the argument was the easy route and therefore a cheap shot.

To take cheap shots is the way of the Bushites. I want the man I support to be better than that.

As for irony, I find it very ironic that people advocating a position of tolerance on a subject dealing with tolerance are intolerant of other opinions.


Ed

 

[cantdog]

Mea culpa, then. Sorry I spoke. I detest the lot of them, myself. I do not, thank goodness, have to vote for either one.

I saw what occurred as much as anyone. I have gay friends, a transitioning friend, and a daughter. It may have colored my view of the matter.

I think the whole outrage about the girl is manufactured, for effect. They can stuff it. But if the shot is cheap, eh bien, I must be intolerant. Tempest in a teapot, altogether. I'm willing to accept the intolerant label and think people gullible who buy into the outrage the GOP wants to create over this.



People exercise the franchise in incredibly irresponsible ways. I'm afraid that if we could somehow peer into the conscious and unconscious of every voter in depth, we would find that the resulting disclosure that most of the electorate acted on incorrect or wholly irrelevant beliefs would be such a national embarrassment as to call into question why we bother with the entire exasperating process.

He was insensitive. Fine. Vote on that basis, and you're mad.

I fail to see that the question of whether someone served in the military, dodged the draft, or whatnot can possibly have any bearing on the whole thing. What's his politics? That's the question. I would vote for Mother Fucking Hubbard if she had the right politics, what ever the poor woman did in 1968 about the war. All this hogwash is frustrating as hell.

People, we're engaged in more empire building. From the beginning of the 19th century, spreading out across the continent, this has been a conquering, imperial country.

Teddy Roosevelt, in many ways an admirable figure, was against any sympathy for brown people.
"It is indeed a warped, perverse, and silly morality which would forbid a course of conquest that has turned whole continents into the seats of mighty and flourishing civilizations," said he. Winning of the West, v.3, page 44. "All men of sane and wholesome thought must dismiss with impatient contempt the plea that these continents should be reserved for the use of scattered savage tribes, whose life was but a few degrees less meaningless, squalid, and ferocious than that of the wild beasts with whom they hold joint ownership."

We have never stopped since. Of all the issues that the presidential election will revolve around, and that the campaigns will do their level best to distract us from with unutterable twaddle, none is more important to me, even the loss of a constitutional state for a police state, than our foreign policy.

The bombings, invasions, coups d'etat (as Haiti), depleted uranium and other horrors that are built into United States foreign policy relentlessly and regularly bring the world much more suffering and despair than any American domestic policy does at home.

I do not yearn for "anybody but Bush."

I yearn for a president who will put an end to America's interminable indecent interventions against humanity.

Kerry called for an increase of forty thousand active-duty Army troops. This is not exactly the kind of relief our shell-shocked world hungers for.

He says we need to educate the next generation of Islamic youth, in order to compete with the radical madrassahs. Improving "image." Great. It ain't image, it ain't public relations. It ain't poverty, it ain't a misunderstanding. It's the harm we do to these people. The interventions.

"The U.S.S. New Jersey, Colin Powell wrote, "started hurling 16-inch shells into the mountains above Beirut"-- this is Lebanon, 1983-- "in World War II style, as if we were softening up the beaches on some Pacific atoll prior to an invasion. What we tend to overlook in such situations is that other people will react much as we would."

Just against the middle east and the muslims, we shot down two Libyan planes in 1981, bombed Libya in 1986, bombed and sank an Iranian ship in 1987, shot down an Iranian passenger plane in 1988, two more Libyan planes in 1989, undertook a massive bombing of the Iraqi people in 1991, continued to bomb and to impose draconian sanctions on Iraqis for the next 12 years, bombed Afghanistan and the Sudan in 1998, habitually supported Israel despite the routine devastation and torture it inflicts on the Palestinians the whole time and for decades before that, habitually condemned and vilified Palestinian resistance to any of that, and now we have SAP, the special-access program, whereby "suspected terrorists" are abducted from muslim countries suchas Malaysia, Pakistan, Lebanon, Albania, and taken to places like Saudi Arabia where they can be tortured, since it is difficult to do that right here. In addition to this, we support and have supported undemocratic and authoritarian torturing strongman governments all over the dar al-Islam from the Shah to the Saudis.

Then George says, "How do I respond when I see that in some Islamic countries there is vitriolic hatred for America? I'll tell you how I respond: I'm amazed. I'm amazed that there's such misunderstanding of what our country is about, that people would hate us. Iam-- I'm like most Americans, I just can't believe it because I know how good we are." (from the Boston Globe)

And we are. So let's start acting like it.

The military budget, each fucking year, is $20,000 per hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born. Every fucking year. And yet Weird Harold can argue with a straight face that we aren't giving the military what it needs. He blames it on liberals.

The weird beliefs entertained in the arena of politics by otherwise sane and intelligent people boggles the fucking imagination.

cantdog the intolerant

 

[BigAndTall]

My opinion was based upon what actually /occurred/, not through any attempt to divine what Kerry /intended./

Any point that needed to be made about gay rights could have been made without bringing Mary Cheney into it. She was brought into it. Inserting her sexuality into the argument was the easy route and therefore a cheap shot.

To take cheap shots is the way of the Bushites. I want the man I support to be better than that.

As for irony, I find it very ironic that people advocating a position of tolerance on a subject dealing with tolerance are intolerant of other opinions.


Ed

Wow. Man. You just really impressed me. I don't know you at all, but that is about the best post on Kerry (pro Kerry that is, not anti Bush) I have ever read.

You really just crumbled about 6 months of my disgust for Kerry folks in about 15 seconds.

Thank you.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Cant,

No one said you should change your vote over this. I seriously doubt Teach would change from Kerry to Bush for anything short of Kerry guning down the entire staff and patrons at the local McDonalds.

At the same time, John Kerry is no saint, he is no messiah, and in this case, he took a cheap shot. There was no need to bring up anyone in response to the question. If he had to use an example they abound, Ellen Degeneres, Rosie O'donald, etc. People who risked their jobs and stardom for coming out. He chose Mary Cheeny because it hit at his opponents. The excuses here ramble on about how it hit at the hypocracy of the GOP. Fine. That's still using her orientation as a political tool for political gain. For someone who supposedly gave the more humane answer, he USED her orientation as the basis for a politically motivated barb.

There was no call for it. Even long time democrats have told me privately it was a low blow. If you don't see it that way, you have that right. A lot here do. But those that do see it as a low blow have the right to as well. There is no shame in holding both candidates to a higher standard. From a non partisan viewpoint, the inability of liberals to admit Kerry has ANY faults, is just as hypocritical to me as the multiple examples of the GOP's trangressions.

They are all a pack of bastards, you just choose your posion with them. I just wish people would take the Socrates approach and say, wow I am drinking Hemlock, rather than the jones town approach of Mmmmmmmmm good coolade!

-Colly

 

[cantdog]

Yep, he made a statement using something for political gain.

In a debate conducted for political purposes.

I can't get too fried about it, myself. But to each his own.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Yep, he made a statement using something for political gain.

In a debate conducted for political purposes.

I can't get too fried about it, myself. But to each his own.

Not using something Cant. Using someone. That is where my anger lies. She's a human being. I seriously doubt she appreciates John Kery turning her orientation into someting to take a dig at her father. Is that so hard to see?

-Colly

 

[Guest]

I understand what you're saying, Colly.

But the Cheney's have already used their daughter politically. She's been quite active in the campaign, and she was sitting front and center at the convention.

Because she is a willing participant, I think she's fair game.

And I'm more amazed at Dick Cheney in this entire situation.

He is supporting a movement to seriously discriminate against his own child.

How can he face her at the end of the day?

What a fuckwad.

 

[Guest]

Gosh, I'm amazed this is still going on. Only read posts by Colly and Cant (smooches to you both). Cant, I hear you. Colly, I do see what you say, but it's not what I saw. I thought absolutely nothing of the matter when I heard the debate live, except for Kerry's main point, and no more now with all the plainly unnecessary hoopla. That's it for me.

Perdita

 

[cantdog]

No, I guess it isn't. But I put the politicos in another category, I suppose. You got me. Thanks for opening my eyes again, Colly.

I wonder if we could really stand one another long enough to realize how many fine qualities we have, if we had just met each other socially somewhere? This is such a strange space, these boards. I'm glad to have met you here, where I have a chance to reflect upon your statements and your convictions before spouting off.

Even if I don't always avail myself of the opportunity to reflect. And spout off anyway! But I want you to have a good opinion of me. I've learned to respect you, as so many have, here.

sincerely

cantdog

 

[cantdog]

Hey, Blackbeard!

Sorry, Ed. I've been a little peevish. I'll be so glad when the middle of November comes, and we can all act normally again, and spend more time on the craft of writing than the minutiae of poltical discourse.

Maybe then, though, it'll be religion! There's no end to it, really, is there?

I'm not stupid; I haven't been so blind as not to see that you are worthy of my respect, as well.

cantdog

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: I understand what you're saying, Colly.

But the Cheney's have already used their daughter politically. She's been quite active in the campaign, and she was sitting front and center at the convention.

Because she is a willing participant, I think she's fair game.

And I'm more amazed at Dick Cheney in this entire situation.

He is supporting a movement to seriously discriminate against his own child.

How can he face her at the end of the day?

What a fuckwad.

I don't have a political axe to grind. I detest both party's candidates equally. My concern is really only about how a duaghter feels when someone Uses her to get at her father.

It didn't have to be said. His point could have been illustrated in a million different ways, if it even needed illustration. He chose the low road.

It dosen't surprise me. The fact that so many people I usually can count on to disdain someone making an example of someone based on their orientation does surpriseme a little.

My view point is obviously terribly jaundiced by my own life. I'm a lesbian. My dad is a staunch republican. I don't know if he would be hurt to find out, but I love him enough that I won't risk it by coming out to him. If I did come out and some Ass used my orientation to get in a dig at him, I know how I would feel. Projecting my own feelings onto someone who is out and an activist is probably wrong. But I cannot help but believe she wanted to crawl in a hole and pull the earth over her head when he did that.

-Colly

 

[Colleen Thomas]

No, I guess it isn't. But I put the politicos in another category, I suppose. You got me. Thanks for opening my eyes again, Colly.

I wonder if we could really stand one another long enough to realize how many fine qualities we have, if we had just met each other socially somewhere? This is such a strange space, these boards. I'm glad to have met you here, where I have a chance to reflect upon your statements and your convictions before spouting off.

Even if I don't always avail myself of the opportunity to reflect. And spout off anyway! But I want you to have a good opinion of me. I've learned to respect you, as so many have, here.

sincerely

cantdog

I have never, ever, assumed you had anything but the most wonderful and compassionate feelings at heart in any statement. You are a credit to humanity, one of the few people I can think of who's altruism and compassion for his fellow man I never doubt of look to see an ulterior motive in. I don't just respect you Cant, I think the world of you.

For any time my viewpoint has caused you to think, I assure you that you have caused me to think many times that. You are a great person and I think the world would be a significantly better place if more poeple cared as selflessly as you do for everyone around them, and not just those who look, act or think like they do.

Even in the most heated exchange, you may rest assured, I have never stopped respecting you.

-Colly

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Gosh, I'm amazed this is still going on. Only read posts by Colly and Cant (smooches to you both). Cant, I hear you. Colly, I do see what you say, but it's not what I saw. I thought absolutely nothing of the matter when I heard the debate live, except for Kerry's main point, and no more now with all the plainly unnecessary hoopla. That's it for me.

Perdita

It is a pointless debate Dita, in as much as both sides are playing politics with it. I just feel so strongly, because I look at her, and think that so easily could be me. And I hurt for her, even if she felt no pain. Not, perhaps, the most intellectual position I have ever taken on something, but one I can't help but feel.

-Colly

 

[cantdog]

I'm overwhelmed. Thank you. I really don't imagine myself quite as good as that. I just do my best to think straight. But I lack the courage to really walk the walk. The Amnesty people who knock on the door at Abu Ghraib asking to see the place, the Physicians Without Borders chaps who go into places like Afghanistan and the Congo, I am ashamed of myself when I think how heroic they are.

They humble me. And a tribute of this kind abashes me.

 

[Guest]

Colly, I'm really sorry for your pain re. this. It's enough for me to stop trying to make a point. It's all really getting too much for so many. I just want it to be Christmas now.

kiss and hug, Perdita

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colly, I'm really sorry for your pain re. this. It's enough for me to stop trying to make a point. It's all really getting too much for so many. I just want it to be Christmas now.

kiss and hug, Perdita

*HUGS*

I think the reason we only have elections ever 4 years is beacuse itt akes us that long to recover from the last one Dita. On this subject I have no more to say, hopefully I can keep my mouth shut till after november now

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I'm overwhelmed. Thank you. I really don't imagine myself quite as good as that. I just do my best to think straight. But I lack the courage to really walk the walk. The Amnesty people who knock on the door at Abu Ghraib asking to see the place, the Physicians Without Borders chaps who go into places like Afghanistan and the Congo, I am ashamed of myself when I think how heroic they are.

They humble me. And a tribute of this kind abashes me.

Not everyone can go to the congo or visit the dark places of the world. For many of them, the fact that there are people like you back home who Do know what they are doing and care is what keeps them there.

Caring is the hardest part. Even if your actions are nothing more than making sure people know there is another way, you are fighting the good fight.

*HUGS*

 

[Huckleman2000]

Re: Re: I understand what you're saying, Colly.

I don't have a political axe to grind. I detest both party's candidates equally. My concern is really only about how a duaghter feels when someone Uses her to get at her father.

It didn't have to be said. His point could have been illustrated in a million different ways, if it even needed illustration. He chose the low road.

It dosen't surprise me. The fact that so many people I usually can count on to disdain someone making an example of someone based on their orientation does surpriseme a little.

My view point is obviously terribly jaundiced by my own life. I'm a lesbian. My dad is a staunch republican. I don't know if he would be hurt to find out, but I love him enough that I won't risk it by coming out to him. If I did come out and some Ass used my orientation to get in a dig at him, I know how I would feel. Projecting my own feelings onto someone who is out and an activist is probably wrong. But I cannot help but believe she wanted to crawl in a hole and pull the earth over her head when he did that.

-Colly

I'm sorry Colly, but Mary Cheney's situation isn't yours. Her parents know she is a lesbian, and have expressed nothing but pride to this point. There is very little in this to assume that Kerry was trying to "get in a dig" at her father over his daughter being a lesbian. I'm sorry that you feel that having a lesbian daughter is something that is an insult to that parent. Dick and Lynne Cheney have never acted that way until now, and that is the sad thing here, to my eyes.

Mary Cheney is well beyond the point of crawling into a hole over public acknowledgement of her sexuality. In terms of being hurt by it, I'm sure that there are gay political groups who've said nasty things about her over her willingness to work for a campaign that is actively working to limit and outlaw gay rights. Until now, she has been able to point to her parents and say, "They aren't Bush. They have publicly disagreed with the anti-gay policy." Their reaction to this flap has exposed that they have shame about it, or are willing to act as if they do to placate an interest group that they have paid lip-service to in order to maintain ruling power.

The fact that the Bush Cheney campaign employs openly gay officials, and that Cheney goes along with their anti-gay agenda, despite the fact that he has publicly embraced his own gay daughter, is a legitimate campaign issue. They want to claim both sides of an issue, and Mary Cheney has been complicit in that.

Kerry was not making an issue of Mary Cheney's lesbianism - it already was an issue, and it was Bush/Cheney who made it one. Kerry merely brought attention to the hypocrisy of Bush's stand on it. Was that a "low blow"? No, it was a punch that Bush left himself wide open for. And Kerry landed it far more softly than he could've.

Colly, I'm sorry that you "despise both party's candidates equally", and that your imagined response to this is to "crawl in a hole and pull the earth over her head".

For those of us who give a damn, we realize that politics can be ugly business, and anyone who gets involved is fair game. We see a difference between the candidates, and care about who wins.

Cant, I understand your position, I just think it's hopelessly idealistic. I'm not voting for a friend, or personal moral arbiter, or spiritual leader. That's what the anti-gay people want, and that's the cynical pose that Bush and Cheney are willing to adopt to gain their support, with no conviction to actually follow through on their position. I'm not intolerant of your position, I just think it's an irrelevant position to take under the circumstances.

Maybe if you were in that situation, you wouldn't have mentioned Mary Cheney. My point is, if you wouldn't have mentioned Mary Cheney, there's no way you would ever be in that position.

 

[cantdog]

Preserve us from spiritual leaders in that office! Things are bad enough!

A lot of us would end up like Charles I, if we were that unlucky.

 

[Pure]

Aside from 'poor Mary' as a topic:

do you know what's going to be fun. during the Bush second term, watching amicus, as the 'faith based' evangelicals get even stronger, Christianity becomes more identified with patriotism, and some of his favorite reading at Literotica, for instance, becomes unavailable.

watching amicus expound the idea of 'freedom' as based in limited, small government, as it becomes obligatory to have a new photo ID, SS card, with retinal image, that's scanable, like the cards used in bank machines. "Swipe" when you want to enter this building-- major private firm or govt--'swipe' as you board a train or plane-- maybe even a bus. The one with the soldier-guard in it.

a good many intelligent Republicans are worried. i suppose there will be a 'seeping down' eventually.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Re: Re: I understand what you're saying, Colly.

I'm sorry Colly, but Mary Cheney's situation isn't yours. Her parents know she is a lesbian, and have expressed nothing but pride to this point. There is very little in this to assume that Kerry was trying to "get in a dig" at her father over his daughter being a lesbian. I'm sorry that you feel that having a lesbian daughter is something that is an insult to that parent. Dick and Lynne Cheney have never acted that way until now, and that is the sad thing here, to my eyes.

Mary Cheney is well beyond the point of crawling into a hole over public acknowledgement of her sexuality. In terms of being hurt by it, I'm sure that there are gay political groups who've said nasty things about her over her willingness to work for a campaign that is actively working to limit and outlaw gay rights. Until now, she has been able to point to her parents and say, "They aren't Bush. They have publicly disagreed with the anti-gay policy." Their reaction to this flap has exposed that they have shame about it, or are willing to act as if they do to placate an interest group that they have paid lip-service to in order to maintain ruling power.

The fact that the Bush Cheney campaign employs openly gay officials, and that Cheney goes along with their anti-gay agenda, despite the fact that he has publicly embraced his own gay daughter, is a legitimate campaign issue. They want to claim both sides of an issue, and Mary Cheney has been complicit in that.

Kerry was not making an issue of Mary Cheney's lesbianism - it already was an issue, and it was Bush/Cheney who made it one. Kerry merely brought attention to the hypocrisy of Bush's stand on it. Was that a "low blow"? No, it was a punch that Bush left himself wide open for. And Kerry landed it far more softly than he could've.

Colly, I'm sorry that you "despise both party's candidates equally", and that your imagined response to this is to "crawl in a hole and pull the earth over her head".

For those of us who give a damn, we realize that politics can be ugly business, and anyone who gets involved is fair game. We see a difference between the candidates, and care about who wins.

Cant, I understand your position, I just think it's hopelessly idealistic. I'm not voting for a friend, or personal moral arbiter, or spiritual leader. That's what the anti-gay people want, and that's the cynical pose that Bush and Cheney are willing to adopt to gain their support, with no conviction to actually follow through on their position. I'm not intolerant of your position, I just think it's an irrelevant position to take under the circumstances.

Maybe if you were in that situation, you wouldn't have mentioned Mary Cheney. My point is, if you wouldn't have mentioned Mary Cheney, there's no way you would ever be in that position.

You have a right to your opinion. In the end, it's just that, an opinion, one among millions. I have a right to mine. It seems to me nothing Kerry could say would nonpluss you. That's fine to, being completely partisan is the way the country seems to be heading.

Since you are completely partisan, or at least from other posts you seem to be that way, your opinion carries little weight with me, since it isn't by any stretch of the imagination objective.

While I am not one to usually agree with Amicus, you certainly seem to be practicing the moral bankruptcy he accuses liberals of. Touting a party that supposedly cares about individuals and individual dignity, while exercising a complete callousness towards an individual who's orientation has made her a target.

I have respect for teach, he applies his liberalism evenly and expressed the opinion that his man went low. I have respect for Cant, who didn't see it as a low blow, but can admit it was proably hurtful, intentioned or not. Certainly I respect Dita, who ackowledges I do have a point, even if she didn't see it that way herself.

You can't even ackowledge I might have a point. You can't even start to discuss it without flying off on Bush bashing. That's fine too, there is clearly enough evil in the current administration to rouse passions.

I do take exception however, to your implying I don't understand politics. Even those who don't like me tend to accept I have as firm a grounding as most anyone here.

I resent your intimation that I can see no difference in the candidates. It's a cheap attempt to cast me among the naive, stupid and lazy. Just because I recognize they are both assholes, dosen't mean I can't see they are different types of asshole.

It is perhaps ironic that it is me, the conservative who can express compassion for someone while you, the liberal are totally callous. On the other hand it just might be that Amicus has a point. In your blind hatred of GWB, you have adopted the GWB line, "if you aren't for us, you're against us," Even more, in your paniced need to see him ousted, you are willing to pass on the precepts of your philosophy. In effect, becoming as intolerant, callous, cold hearted and snide as those you hate for being callous, coldhearted, intolerant and snide.

Food fo thought, this morning, if you care to partake. Or you can just dismiss me as being stupid because I don't think John Kerry is the messiah, descending from heaven in white to save us from the horned demons of the GOP.

-Colly

In parting I would like to add that I never once intimated that this incident should be grounds for voteing against Kerry. I'm not practicing false indignation in an effort to stir people up or change opinion or inspire outrage. Nor have I parroted a party line that is obviously hyporcitical and out there for political gain.