Is this what we want in our candidate?

[Mile Hi]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/02/12/john_kerrys_shifting_stands/


IN THE 2004 presidential field, there is a candidate for nearly every point of view. His name is John Kerry.

>snip>

Here's how it works: Say you're in favor of capital punishment for terrorists. Well, so is Kerry. "I am for the death penalty for terrorists because terrorists have declared war on your country," he said in December 2002. "I support killing people who declare war on our country."

But if you're opposed to capital punishment even for terrorists, that's OK -- Kerry is too! Between 1989 and 1993, he voted at least three times to exempt terrorists from the death penalty. In a debate with former governor William Weld, his opponent in the 1996 Senate race, Kerry scorned the idea of executing terrorists. Anti-death penalty nations would refuse to extradite them to the United States, he said. "Your policy," he told Weld, "would amount to a terrorist protection policy. Mine would put them in jail."

<snip>

Take the Patriot Act. Kerry condemns it fiercely as the stuff of a "knock-in-the-night" police state. He vows "to end the era of John Ashcroft" by "replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time."

So does that mean he voted against it in 2001? Au contraire! Kerry voted for the law -- parts of which he originally wrote. He singled out its money-laundering sections for particular praise but declared that he was "pleased at the compromise we have reached on the antiterrorism legislation as a whole."

Bottom line, then: Is Kerry for or against the Patriot Act? Absolutely.

<snip>

So on the one hand, he voted against the federal Defense of Marriage Act, calling the law "fundamentally ugly" and "legislative gay-bashing." On the other hand, he says he's against same-sex marriage and refused to condemn a DOMA-like amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution. (At one point last week, he left open the possibility of endorsing it.) On the other other hand, he supports civil unions -- same-sex marriage in all but name. And on yet another other hand, he claims to "have the same position Vice President Dick Cheney has." (Cheney's view is that "different states are likely to come to different conclusions, and that's appropriate.")

Where Kerry will ultimately come down on this issue is anybody's guess. But it's safe to say that wherever you come down, he'll be able to claim he was there all along.

[Kahuna]

1. Don't depress me. Kerry has so much negative baggage.

<sigh>

[RedEarth]

2. Maybe you should post this on the freeper board

I bet they would like it.....

[Evil_Dewers]

5. "Maybe you should post this on the freeper board"

It sounds like he already posts there--unless he shows up again to offer a better alternative to el Shrubo.

[WilliamPitt]

3. I know you're new here, but

one is expected to warn posters when using a right-wing asshole like Jeff Jacoby as a source.

[Eloriel]

7. What in the article is wrong?

Looks mostly like a cut-and-paste job of Kerry's own words. What are you objecting to? The truth?

You can condemn the author for being a rightwing asshole if you want (shoot the messenger), but as I read the piece, it looks dead on to me.

So why don't you enlighten us?

And also -- just how the hell is anyone who's not from MA supposed to know the political leanings of any given LOCAL commentator? I certainly wouldn't have from this piece. I could just as easily imagine this appearing in The Nation. Or CommonDreams. Or TO. Would I be expected to search out his other columns to make sure?

[WilliamPitt]

14. Anyone who reads tjhe Boston Globe on a daily basis

as I do, knows Jeff Jacoby all too well. Do a search to see who you're defending.

[judge_smales]

4. I only want one thing in a cadidate. Just ONE

That his name NOT be Bush.

That's it. I really don't give a flying fuck about the rest. He's got my vote.

[ShimokitaJer]

9. Then you vote for mediocrity

Thanks for making the rest of us have to work that much harder for change.

[judge_smales]

10. Beats the pants off what I have now.

If you've got a better suggestion I'm all ears.

[ShimokitaJer]

15. And why do you think we have what we have now?

It was the Democratic party's failure to distinguish its agenda from that of the Republicans that drove more liberal voters to Nader and resulted in 20% of registered Democrats voting for Bush over Gore.

It's not enough to simply vote the party line. You have to use your vote to encourage change.

[judge_smales]

16. How is voting ABB

doing anything but that?

[eileen_d]

17. The assumption is that you are so deeply dissatisfied

with the Democratic Party as it currently is, that voting Bush out is not a sufficient "change" to make.

At least that's how I interpret it. I don't share this view. For me, voting for the nominee (sometimes called "ABB") is a first-things-first thang. :shrug:

[redqueen]

19. Kucinich

You can always feel good about selling out (ABB) in the GE.

[Eloriel]

6. What I keep wondering, as I ponder his "both sides" reputation

is how on earth would he govern? I can't imagine him making up his mind firmly about ANYthing. And as we all know, nature abhors a vaccum. Where there's a vacuum of power, there WILL be some force (most likely a thoroughly Republican Congress) who will step in and make up the difference.

I can't imagine him HAVING any policy agendas of his own, let alone getting them enacted.

[judge_smales]

8. Yeah, I guess you're right.

I suppose we should all vote for Bu$h. Thanks for showing us the light.

[redqueen]

11. Does it matter how he would govern?

It's all about team sports now. "our side" will have won, which means that continuing the occupation of iraq is fine, because a democrat is in charge. Same thing with free trade... since a democrat is at the helm, we can all relax, because it's okay, it's 'our side', so they have our best interests at heart, right? right?

[judge_smales]

12. OK!! OK!! I'm convinced already. You can stop now!!

I'll vote for Bush, OK??

I suppose we should all vote for Bu$h. Thanks for showing us the light.

[redqueen]

20. Nice strawman

Did I say you should vote for bush? How about you consider supporting a democrat who doesn't vote with republicans in the primaries, so we can avoid forcing the rest of the non-republicans in the country to have to hold their noses and vote for republican lite in the GE?

[Karmadillo]

13. Jeff Jacoby? Just out of curiosity, what Democratic candidate

would meet with his approval?

[justinpower]

18. Leiberman

Not that he would meet with his approval, but he is certainly kinder to Joe than any other dems.