Kerry Would Consider Anti-Abortion Judges (MSNBC\AP)

[WillyT]

Consider them WHAT?!?!?!?

<snip>

Calling himself a strict constructionist, a phrase Bush has used to describe himself, Kerry paraphrased former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart and said: “A good justice is somebody that when you read their decisions you can’t tell if they are Republican or Democratic or liberal or conservative, a Christian or a Jew, a Muslim, male or female. You just know you’re reading a good judicial opinion.”

Kerry said he has voted in favor of “any number of judges who are pro-life or pro-something else that I may not agree with,” some of whom were nominated by Republican presidents. “But I’m going to make sure we uphold what I believe are Constitutional rights and I’m not going to pick somebody who’s going to undermine those rights.”

“Do they have to agree with me on everything? No,” Kerry said. Asked if they must agree with his abortion-rights views, he quickly added, “I will not appoint somebody with a 5-4 Court who’s about to undue Roe v. Wade. I’ve said that before.”

“But that doesn’t mean that if that’s not the balance of the court I wouldn’t be prepared ultimately to appoint somebody to some court who has a different point of view. I’ve already voted for people like that. I voted for Judge Scalia.”

<snip>

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5014629/

Man I hate this turn toward the 'Center' shit!!!

What was it they called those latitudes towards the Equator; the horse latitudes??? Where sailing ships of old had to toss horses and other stuff over board because they were heavy, and were impeding movement because of lack of wind in the sails???

Interesting metaphor!

The 'Center', aka the Donkey latitudes!!!

:argh:

[KissMyAsscroft]

1. You really just have to ignore this crap..

Its pandering and he isnt going to do it.

Remember when Bush was campaigning as a "compassionate conservative?"

[Just Me]

2. He has to "WIN", period.

His opponent is willing to say anything and break all rules of decency, honesty, integrity and morals.

The only way to overcome such an opponent is to be better at a new game.

Once he "wins", then "center" will actually feel much much better than what we are experiencing right now. Believe me.

[w13rd0]

4. "It'll feel much better"...

...gee, I've heard that line before. Thanks, but I'd still like to use the lubricant.

[WillyT]

6. LOL... Good One !!!

:evilgrin:

[Just Me]

9. Hey, dude,...lube away *LOL*.

Change is a long-term process and investment. If you're looking for quick results, you will always be disappointed. Welcome to humanity.

[Just Me]

40. Can I freakin' PROTEST this thread?

*sigh*

Geez.

United we stand,...divided we fall,...

:puke:

[w13rd0]

46. You can ignore it...

...it's the lil boxed x next to the thread title.

[4_Legs_Good]

3. I'm actually glad to hear it.

He makes it clear he'd use Roe v. Wade as a lithmus test, but beyond that he's open. I actually appreciate it.

I wish more of the Justices were more like O'Connor, and less that were ideological one way or the other. I like my judges to think about every issue and vote accordingly.

david

[blm]

5. I agree. I think what he said is what SHOULD be said by any president.

.

[phoebe]

10. He's being extremely smart. As you say, we CANNOT afford to

have any more division in this country. Diplomacy is the key to bringing sides together, no matter the issue. What's done is done - staus quo is no longer tolerable - we need to encourage moderation.

[atre]

65. O'Connor

I don't know how many of O'Connor's opinions I have read, and I must dispute your contention about her impartiality. O'Connor is obsessed with casting the swing votes in the big cases, and other than that often her juriprudence is simply logically inconsistent.

[TahitiNut]

7. "I voted for Judge Scalia."

:puke:

[4_Legs_Good]

8. Now that's NOT something he should be wearing as a badge of honor!

I'll agree with the vomit there.

Bleeeehhhhhh... How'd he feel about Bork?

david

[MikeG]

23. "Before I voted against him"

I know, I know, But its what it fucking sounds like.

[OKNancy]

11. This is good enough for me

“I will not appoint somebody with a 5-4 Court who’s about to undue Roe v. Wade. I’ve said that before.”

[WillyT]

12. That's Fine, But If I Were A Reporter In That Room...

My next question would be, "Senator Kerry, would you consider appointing a judge that has any history with, or ties to, the Federalist Society?"

I'd like to hear the answer to that myself!

:shrug:

[Claire Beth]

36. Kerry would NOT appoint anyone who would overturn Roe Vs Wade...

He said he would "CONSIDER". He's just playing safe politics to not alienate the border line pro-life voters completely.

[mzmolly]

13. Cripes. Well I take this to mean he would consider someone who

is "personally" opposed to abortion, but will uphold the constitution and not threated a womans right to chose.

Here is the key statment.

Democrat John Kerry said Wednesday he’s open to nominating anti-abortion judges as long as that doesn’t lead to the Supreme Court overturning the landmark 1973 ruling that made abortion legal.

I expect clarification from him and or his staff soon? Abortion must remain legal, that is the key.

[WillyT]

14. Right !!! - And Just How Does One...

appoint an anti-abortion judge without putting Roe v. Wade in peril.

Appoint him as a Traffic Court Judge???

:shrug:

[dolstein]

16. Easy -- appoint five pro-choice justices first

If you can count to nine, you can figure this one out.

[WillyT]

18. Make It Six, And Ya Have A Deal, LOL !!!

NO MORE 5 TO 4 !!!

:shrug:

[Just Me]

20. BWAHAHAHAHAH,....geez, you just made me spew pop everywhere.

Please, don't post such well-reasoned posts *LOL*!!!!

:kick:

[lastliberalintexas]

42. Actually,

he could appoint them to the lower courts. The president has the ability to appoint to more than just the SC you know. Smart a** comments about being able to count to 9 notwithstanding.

And while that would not put Roe v. Wade in peril *nationwide*, it could make it harder for women in certain appellate circuits to obtain access to certain health care procedures.

And if these judges do not find a right to privacy in the Constitution, what else would they be opposed to? Would Kerry be willing to appoint an allegedly strict constructionist judge who would overturn Griswold? If a judicial candidate doesn't believe that implied rights of the citizenry can be found in the Constitution so as to deny governmental control over private lives, why would a Dem/liberal/progressive want to nominate such an individual to a seat FOR LIFE?

The allegations that these comments of Kerry's (and many others) are just campaign rhetoric are ridiculous. He's probably alienating at least as many (or more) liberals as he is attracting "pro-lifers" with these comments. Not a good campaign move.

[Occulus]

72. however

By placing ANTI-abotion judges lower in the system and then appointing PRO choice judges to the SCOTUS, he could actually end up strengthening a woman's right to choose via legal challenges.

Go ahead; let Kerry put those judges in places lower in the system. Sometimes, the only way to prove that good law is in fact good law is to allow it to be challenged and worm its way to the SCOTUS.

My guess is that any decision revoking the legality of abortions in the country would have a moratorium placed on he enforcement of the decision until it got to the SCOTUS anyway. The right (to an abortion) would, I'm guessing, emerge stronger than it was before.

However, Kerry describing himself as a "strict constructionist" really, really bothers me; the phrase always raises red flags.

[WillyT]

74. LOL !!! - Some Folks Here Can't Help Diving Into Condescension !!!

But hey... If I'd been a Lieberman supporter, I'd be bitter too.

:evilgrin:

[lastliberalintexas]

76. The funny thing is

I've actually defended both dolstein and Lieberman! :o


(and this is one of the issues I've used in defense of Lieberman, since he actually has one of our strongest pro-choice voting records)

[mzmolly]

19. LOL.. Ya know, you've got me.

I just know alot of Dems who are personally opposed to abortion (aka choice) but would not want to threaten "legal" abortions in any way. :shrug:

[Freddie Stubbs]

61. Appoint someone who believes that Roe v Wade is a sound decision

It is possible to be personally opposed to a law but to still enforce it. For example Jerry Brown is now running for Attorney General of California. He is opposed to the death penalty, but has promised that if elected, he will uphold the law even though he disagrees with it.

[dolstein]

15. Hey fella, don't get your panties in a bunch

He says he's not going to appoint any justice to the Supreme Court that would tilt the balance in favor of an anti-choice majority. And of course, the truth of the matter is that Kerry's not going to appoint any anti-Roe judges period. Anyone who believes that Kerry would appoint anyone to the federal bench who is on the record as opposing Roe is obviously a few fries short of a happy meal. But Kerry isn't going to come out and announce that. Why should he? Unlike Ralph Nader, Kerry's goal isn't to energize five percent of the electorate. His goal is to win the election, and that includes getting the votes of many Catholics who wouldn't be thrilled with a candidate who was determined to apply a pro-choice litmus test to all members of the federal judiciary.

[WillyT]

17. I Really Do Realize All That, But Watching This Sewage Is Nauseating !!!

The obvious pandering make me wretch. And I'm runnin thin on barf bags, ya know???

According to most polls I've been seeing, the Independents are siding with us so far. Don't know what that means for Centrists. But Kerry using a RW phrase like,"I believe in strict constructionists..." makes my fucking skin crawl.

:puke:

[Just Me]

22. Believing in "strict constructionists" is a very, very good thing.

Perhaps your interpretation blends religious and other fears.

BUT, strictly constructing the law, as it is,...is way, way better than those who are presently seeking to RE-construct the law.

You need alot of assurance and nurturance. Go hug someone,...it could help you out.

[lastliberalintexas]

43. Are you kidding me?

Or do you just not know that "strict constructionist" is the catch phrase used by the RWers for Federalist Society judges? ACLU type judges are referred to as "activist" by the RW, just so you know.

There are far too many things wrong with so-called strict constructionists for me to list them. Just know that repubs look to our current SC Chief Justice (or even Scalia) as the model for a strict constructionist. And *that's* what is wrong with strict constructionist judges.

[IndianaGreen]

47. The Dred Scott decision was "strict constructionism" at its best

The phrase was coined by Richard Nixon as a code word for Ashcroft-style law and order. If you support the PATRIOT Act, you would have loved hearing Tricky Dick spout about strict constructionist judges.

[sangh0]

25. " obvious pandering" makes you retch?

And your hobby is politics?

Talk about masochism!!!

[WillyT]

28. LOL !!! - Yeah, You Should See My Whips And Chains !!!

Shoulda stuck with baseball cards I guess!

:silly:

[Mountainman]

21. My belief is that you don't have enough people who think like you to elect

a President. The vast majority of Americans are moderates. You have to work with in the Democratic party to build support for your ideas. When they become main street enough they will be heard.

Until then you are just going to frustrate your self. If you don't get to play your way you are going to take your marbles and go home.

But be prepared to hate Bush for 4 more years.

[WillyT]

27. Dude... Me And My Marbles Are Going To The Polls In November, And...

Voting for Kerry!!!

I just HATE the obvious and INSULTING way we have to go about getting votes from people who are either amazingly ignorant of history, bereft of commitment, or both!!!

:argh:

[Mountainman]

35. I hate it too! I am a member of the Democratic Socialists of America

I would like very much to have a left leaning President. I want political and social justice so bad I can taste it. But I think that I have to start with the community I'm in because the larger community is just as you say.

[Pastiche423]

24. Another day, another reason...

[Demeter]

26. REALLY? OVER HOW MANY WOMEN'S DEAD BODIES?

Why in the name of reason and democracy do we have to hear this crap?

It is not acceptable, period. No Ideologues Allowed.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

29. I think it's an absolute brilliant statement that rips the activist judge

mantra out from under Karl Rove.

[WillyT]

30. Sort Of A Triangulation Strangulation Type Of Thing ???

Man, I hope you're right!

:shrug:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

32. Read the statement carefully...he couched it with the makeup

of the court and with CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

[corporatewhore]

31. so why shouldnt i vote third party again???

[AngryWhiteLiberal]

33. Why o'why did we get stuck with this schmuck. Draft DEAN.

Voting for Scalia is NOT what one wants to hear from his/her prospective Democratic nominee.

Sorry, folks...but, this is one election I'm sitting out in good conscience. Kerry just proved that he's a "kinder" Repuke wannabe.

What the fuck do we have to do in the country to get a REAL Democrat with LIBERAL values?????

JB

[Mountainman]

38. Convince enough people to be liberal

I think we are about to see the pendulum swing back toward the left. If we get a Dem President and Senate and get health care and more jobs for people than liberal ideas can be planted and take root.

If enough of us sit out the election that will never happen. The next for years may be the most important in this country's history.

Do we become a nation of the wealthy and working poor or do we become a country that is just and fair for all.

The conservatives took many many years to gain absolute power. It will take us that long too.

[MikeG]

34. Someone tell me why the fuck he had to say this?

[Just Me]

39. To win. *eom*

[MikeG]

41. If he says it once more, I'll stay home in November.

And I'm from a swing state, Pa.
Enough of this centrist shit.
We need a real liberal fucking Democrat.

[Colin Ex]

54. Lame.

"Centrist shit" is what wins elections.

Threatening to stay home accomplishes nothing and doesn't cast you in a very positive light.

If you're really that disgusted, vote third party. But saying "I'M STAYING HOME" is lame.

-C

[LoZoccolo]

57. Destroying Roe vs. Wade to save it?

Interesting.

[IndianaGreen]

48. To win what?

Operation Rescue's votes?

[Demobrat]

37. The only reason I would have considered voting for Kerry

just flew out the window.

[Democat]

45. You would rather see Bush win?

That is the choice - Bush or Kerry. Face reality.

[Demobrat]

77. Couldn't care less.

The only reason to vote for Kerry just flew out the window, and I make enough money to be a Republican.

[Nlighten1]

44. Stay the course!

Keep jumping to the middle! It is the place that has inspired 50% of voters to STAY HOME!

[lastliberalintexas]

75. LOL!

Why would we want the great unwashed masses to vote? Why, they might actually elect an honest to goodness Socialist! ;-)

[DFLforever]

49. Maybe Kerry's changed his mind about soliciting the nomination of

the Democratic party and instead is seeking to replace Bush as the Repuke nominee.

If so, he's following a brilliant course.

[Ripley]

50. The Beginning of the End.

Thanks alot!

[FlemingsGhost]

51. Adopting "Anybody but Bush," means you get just that:

Anybody.

I have no idea what to expect from a Kerry presidency. He is either shining on the center, or snookering the left.

Roll the dice, Democrats...

[DFLforever]

52. What does the center want? anti-abortion judges who support Roe

Or pro-choice judges who support Roe?
Such a dilemma for our 'pro-choice' candidate,

[Colin Ex]

53. "Man I hate this turn toward the 'Center' shit!!!"

I have some really bad news for you about election strategy...

MOREOVER: It looks to me from reading that snippet that if the first thing that pops into your head is abortion, you're kind of missing the point. As far as I can tell, said point is "I might disagree with some personal beliefs, but the judges I nominate will be good people."

I will concede that I haven't read the discussion started by this thread, but I'm willing to take a stab that people are intepreting that headline as "Kerry will nominate a Priscilla Owen clone" (she's got a long history of anti-abortion judicial activism, documented in Bushwhacked by Molly Ivins, that pretty much makes her look like a fucking lunatic). After that, there'll probably be something to the effect of "How did the democratic party nominate this ass-clown?"

Back to the title of this message:
Maybe this is the 2.00 AM time speaking for me, but read a goddamned book on campaign strategy. If Kerry DIDN'T speed his ass toward the center, we might as well hang ourselves now.

-C

[DaveSZ]

55. I applaud him for saying what he did

My two favorite SC justices were appointed by Republicans - Souter and Stevens.

It would be my hope though that he'd appoint justices that would protect the environment.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

56. Good post

you've got it.

[LoZoccolo]

58. Matter fact, this very thread shows the center is where to go to win.

Kerry says this thing that basically still shows his commitment to Roe vs. Wade, and all these further-left people go off and complain and threaten to stay home etcetera etcetera. Why would a politician court people like that? It is almost no use to court a bunch of high-maintainence self-destructive voters who'll mutiny at the slightest misconstrued hint that they may not like the way someone said something. Advice, people: learn to get what you want.

[MadHound]

60. Leftists as high maintenence, LOL, that's funny friend

Not true, but funny none the less. Tell me friend, when was a bone, even a crumb thrown to the left? Sorry, but the left vote is taken for granted by the Democratic party, after all the mantra is "who else you gonna vote for hippie". And yet after years and decades of being ignored and berated in a vain attempt to capture the mythical grail known as "The Center", the Democrats act all suprised and insulted when the left decides to act in it's own best interest, ie going Green, voting for Nader, staying home. Then its all fearmongering and bully boy tactics.

If you want to insure that the left stays in the Democratic camp, you've got to give something, anything. But nooo, all people want to do is berate and belittle the left, and then use them as scapegoats when their incompetent inept candidates lose. Oh fucking well friend, don't cry when the Dems lose this fall. Apparently the Dems didn't learn a damn thing from '02 when the left stayed home or went Green in droves. Remidial lessons are a bitch friend, perhaps you should think about that.

[LoZoccolo]

64. Fearmongering and bully boy tactics?

And yet after years and decades of being ignored and berated in a vain attempt to capture the mythical grail known as "The Center", the Democrats act all suprised and insulted when the left decides to act in it's own best interest, ie going Green, voting for Nader, staying home.

Act in your own best interest? Bahahahaha! My whole point is that you don't!

I've said this again and again: take your issue to the people rather than threaten the candidates, and the candidates won't be able to ignore it. It's seemed to be a pretty effective strategy for gay and lesbian activists, who have brought same-sex unions up to be a major issue despite being a small segment of the population, and for the environmental movement in the early nineties which brought up quite a bit of awareness on their issues. This "threaten to fuck over everyone to get what I want" strategy would just move the party to the center to compensate. You don't like that? Do something about it.

[MadHound]

66. Sorry friend, but taking the issues to the people has already been done

And while majorities of the populace agree with the left on everything from UHC to publicly funded elections to gun control to abortion to. . . it still doesn't seem to effect the candidate. So yes, it is time to threaten the candidates. Besides, it is a tried and true method to get the Democrats to actually DO something for the left. One example, FDR. In his first re-election bid, FDR was catching some serious heat from the Socialists. Afraid that the Socialists would take enough of the left's votes to allow the Republicans a win, FDR swung abrubtly left and took a couple planks from the Socialists' platform and made them his own. This decision had long lasting effects, since the two planks FDR stole were Social Security and Unemployment Insurance. And FDR won his re-election by going left.

Kerry needs to wake the hell up and stop trying for the Reagan Dems and NASCAR dads. For every vote from those people, he is losing two from the left, who are going third party or not voting. This is how realpolitick works friend, pressure is brought to bear at the weakest point, at the most vunerable time. If Kerry wants to see the Oval Office, then he had better remember his leftist base and throw them a bone, you know, something like UHC, or withdrawl from Iraq. Otherwise he will go down in flames. This scenario was acted out in '02 when leftists stayed home or went third party in droves, and look at the 'Pug landslide. Do you really want to see another remidial lesson of that caliber this here? For that is what is shaping up every time Kerry swings to the center.

[LoZoccolo]

67. The left makes itself completely irrelevant this way.

Besides, it is a tried and true method to get the Democrats to actually DO something for the left.

No it's not! It's not working right now according to you!

First of all, someone says there's no difference between Kerry and Bush* they are crazy or deliberately lying. Where do you start with someone like that? It's no use. You just don't know what excuse they're going to make to mutiny! You wanted it that way! You got it now!

My original point was that if people are gonna throw the kind of fit that you see in this thread, there is no tangible way of dealing with them because they are irrational. I don't know how to deal with irrational people - it's near impossible if not completely impossible, it takes too much time and we've got less than six months now. I mean, go back and look at this bullshit all over this thread! What he said has no tangible effect on Roe vs. Wade, and yet people are showing themselves willing to get it overturned because they don't like the way he put this! HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH THIS MADNESS? HOW DO YOU GET PEOPLE LIKE THAT TO VOTE FOR YOU? Why even try?

For every vote from those people, he is losing two from the left, who are going third party or not voting. For every vote from those people, he is losing two from the left, who are going third party or not voting.

Bullshit. BULLSHIT. That's a completely fabricated statistic. Prove it. It's not realpolitik if you completely made it up. You'd like people to think this, but it's not true.

Do you really want to see another remidial lesson of that caliber this here?

Sounds like you do. And that goes back to the "high-maintanence vote" thing. I should have just said "crazy" vote. If the far-left does this kind of stuff again, and THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE DIE AND LOSE THEIR LIBERTIES BECAUSE OF IT (CONSIDER YOURSELF WARNED AND TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY) they will have cemented themselves as the enemies of the other 45% of the population that votes Democratic, will have proven themselves irrational and self-destructive, and will be regarded as little more than loons for years. They'll be considered worse than half of the Republicans.

[MadHound]

69. Well first of all friend, stop shouting and hurling insults at the left

That simply alienates people, any people, even more.

Secondly, what you do is what I explained in my previous post on FDR. That is the art of compromise. Nick a couple of planks from the Green or Nader platform and put them into the Kerry platform. You know, something like Universal Health Care, or a definitive and quick timetable for getting the US out of Iraq. Most people on the left are smart enough that when you appeal to their self interests, where they feel like they are being included and getting part of the pie, they will join in.

But if the left is continuously taken for granted, bullied into voting dem, or insulted and spat upon when they dare ask for a piece of a pie that has been shared with everybody except the left, don't be suprised if we go elsewhere. This isn't crazy, nor irrational, it is simply the predictable movement of a group of people who realize that though they were once important to this part, they are now no longer wanted.

So guess what, it is cruch time friend. Are you ready to loosen that stiff neck of yours and compromise, or are you going to continue to bully and insult? The choice is plain before you, choose wisely.

[Kolesar]

59. What is your problem with his position people?

What is so offensive about this?

“I will not appoint somebody with a 5-4 Court who’s about to undue Roe v. Wade. I’ve said that before.”

I think there is a lot of the jerking-of-the-knees going on around here.

[MadHound]

63. Because friend

Even if he doesn't appoint an anti-abortion judge to the Supreme Court, he is still open to appointing one to the lower court, where such a judge can wreak havoc. While they wouldn't be able to overturn Roe v Wade, they could easily make it quite difficult for a woman, particularly a minor, to receive an abortion.

Besides, this was supposed to be one of Kerry's defining issues, one the should clearly set him apart from Bushco. Instead, he is out there muddying up the waters and turning of more pro choice and leftists with this BS than the centerist votes he will pick up. Assinine and insensitive this statement is, and one that he should have kept to himself.

ABB, this is the kind of shit when people are too blinded by hate to think, ABB.

[Kolesar]

71. Sorry, but no. The article does not say anything about non-SCOTUS judges

Further: The second paragraph here has a triple negative, so it is hard to figure out what all the pronouns are referring to. The article does not develop the context adequately. I think Kerry is referring to an "if" as in "if the SCOTUS was not 5-4". Well, the make up and majority of the court does hang in the balance, so the answer is purely hypothetical and might as well be a throw away.

excerpt:

“Do they have to agree with me on everything? No,” Kerry said. Asked if they must agree with his abortion-rights views, he quickly added, “I will not appoint somebody with a 5-4 Court who’s about to undue Roe v. Wade. I’ve said that before.”

Confusing, bad editing by MSNBC:

“But that doesn’t mean that if that’s not the balance of the court I wouldn’t be prepared ultimately to appoint somebody to some court who has a different point of view. I’ve already voted for people like that. I voted for Judge Scalia.”

[MadHound]

62. So let's see here people

Is willing to consider and possibly appoint anti abortion judges

Shares Bushco's views on the Israel/Palestine mess.

Isn't going to pull the troops out of Iraq any time soon, just a vague Nixonesque promise to do so before the end of his term.

Is willing to give corporations even more tax breaks in the hope that some sort of vague trickle down job creation.

Is going to have long term, shifting ME military deployments.

Isn't going to repeal the Patriot Act.

Is a strict constructionist(ie a Federalist).

Skull and Bones

You know, I'm sure there are differences between Bush and Kerry, but those differences are getting might hard to see. I'm sorry, but this race to the center(or lowest common denominator) is going to lose the Dems more left votes than the centerist votes he will gain. If people want a Bush like candidate, they will vote for the real deal rather than Bush lite anyday. And meanwhile this swing to the right simply insures that more leftists will go third party or stay at home.

Not a bright move.

[okcdem]

68. Figures....

Looks like it's just gonna be more of the same.

[w4rma]

70. There are already 7 Republican appointees on SCOTUS. We don't need another

That said, I tend to agree with his point about how it shouldn't be obvious whether the judge is Republican or Democratic or liberal or conservative.

[Panquin]

73. Kerry and abortion

I think it's great that a Democratic candidate is embracing pro-life values. As a Christian, that's important to me. And we all know Catholicism strictly prohibits abortion, and Kerry's a practicing Catholic, so this is really no surprise.

If Kerry wants to win the votes of slightly disillusioned Bush supporters, he has to go this way. And I for one support it.