October 09, 2004

SOMETHING BETTER?

In the comments section below, Manny wrote the following defense of voting for Kerry:

With Bush it seems that we will get just more of the same. If you like that then I imagine you will vote for him. But with Kerry we may get something better. There are no guarantees but Kerry is certainly not the ogre of the negative campaign.

However, since the first debate, bloggers have been pointing out how Kerry's plans have already failed. Wretchard wrote about how The Global Test already didn't work for us, and CavX addressed the "allies at the table", Iran, and North Korea. I'm not sure I agree that we "may get something better", since Kerry's suggestions seem to be falling apart even before we get to 2 November.

Posted by: Sarah at 02:52 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I see this as a misrepresentation of one of Kerry's best arguments. While I am an avid student of American history there is one document from our earliest history that should be familiar with all your readers. I am referring to our founding document, the Declaration of Independence. Kerry's argument for US military action that meets the standards of a 'global test' is nothing more that what our founding fathers said when they declared that "... a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." Our founding fathers claimed the right to overthrow a legitimate authority that had become tyranical and said that "To prove this,[the tyrany] let Facts be submitted to a candid world." If our founding fathers were not afraid to explain and to justify themselves to the judgement of mankind I don't see where Bush, or any president, should think he is any better. Kerry's policy just harkens back to the sensible policy of our forefathers. I believe there is an objective right and objective wrong. I believe these things can be determined and that it is only tyrants who believe they need never justify themselves in the court of public opinion. I not saying Bush is a tyrant, but clearly his policy is the exact opposite of Thomas Jefferson's, and it seems of John Kerry's as well. While I believe both Bush and Kerry as just as patriotic as was Jefferson, who 'pledged his life, liberty, and sacred honor' to the revolution it seems that only Bush of these three is contemptious towards what Jefferson called "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind."

Posted by: manny at October 09, 2004 02:06 PM (s6c4t)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
41kb generated in CPU 0.05, elapsed 0.1998 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.1732 seconds, 144 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.