Reply #189: I don't see where anything has changed. [View All]

[Arianrhod]

Kerry has tried taking a swipe at * now and then, but then he returns to lurk mode and passes up dozens of opportunities to really pin the guy to the ground. * has had scandal after scandal come to light, and where has Kerry been? Not a word from him. He could've dealt the entire regime a death blow if he had taken them fully to task for Abu Ghraib, Haliburton, and Fallujah. He should've been calling for their heads.

To those who think that's not politically expedient, I respond that I don't want a president who is dependent on political expediency.

I didn't think that much of his speech. After all, it was only a campaign speech--given under the most favorable of circumstances. When the firing line was open, when * was struggling in the polls, Kerry sat back and watched--when he should have pounced.

I read a lot of militarism in his acceptance speech. I don't like his reference to "America at war"--we aren't at war; I don't like his calling for 40,000 more troops. I didn't like his Iraq vote, or his backpedaling excuse after it looked like a liability.

Now, if he had said, "First step in Iraq is to pull Haliburton out"--well, I might have sat up and taken notice. If he had said, "We will hold immediate Iraq elections, so that the PEOPLE can choose their leaders"--I might have listened. Instead, he's still hoping the UN will go in and clean up the mess they begged us not to make in the first place. Seems like misplaced hope to me.

But hey, that's just me. Maybe I'm asking for too much. I realize there are political realities out there, and perhaps Kerry's tactics are just that: Tactics, meant to draw as many votes as possible. I certainly hope so.

Bottom line is, we need to get rid of *, first and foremost. If I can't have Dean or Kucinich do it, I'll take Kerry. But please, don't anyone ask me to remove my clothespin. I haven't been suitably impressed yet.