Reply #45: IDEALISTS? Try realists. [View All]

[Zhade]

It is painfully obvious that the vast majority of people out there don't give a rats butt about his vote for the IWR, as evidenced by his standing in the primaries.

And that's a sad commentary on Americans as a whole - we don't care about the fact that a man running for president voted to enable an illegal act of war against a country which, as known by millions of average citizens at that time, did NOT pose a threat of any kind. After all, that's how they sold this war to the American people. As a desperate threat that had to be averted. Only problem? THE THREAT WAS A LIE, AND WE KNEW IT.

If we knew, then you can bet your life Kerry knew.

That is the crux of this debate. We know Kerry enabled b*sh for one of two reasons: he went along for political expedience, or he truly believed b*sh had good intentions and was telling the truth.

If the latter is the case, then Kerry is an utter fool and completely unfit for the presidency. If it is the former, he cannot be trusted with that power.

And when it comes to this myth of "electability", Kerry stands on shaky ground. The traitor in the White House can simply point out that Kerry voted to aid b*sh with regards to NCLB, the PA, and the IWR, and what will Kerry do then? All the service medals in the world won't raise him from the hole he is now in.

Unless, of course, the American people prefer retribution and combat bravado over the truth - in which case Kerry's planned continuation of the "war on terrorism" will give them their fill of militarism and empire-building.