Does ANYBODY support John Kerry?

AlGore's DUD speech ^ | 6.07.04 | Mia T

[Mia T]

Does ANYBODY support John Kerry?
 
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://virtualclintonlibrary.blogspot.com
http://demmemogate.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
fiendsofhillary.blogspot.com
fiendsofhillary.us
fiendsofhillary.org
fraudsofhillary.com

[Republican Red]

My dad, although career Air Force, is a raging liberal. He is now a University professor and quite active in local dem politics up north.

He told my mom he would never vote for Kerry. He plans to sit this election out. I think his dislike of Kerry comes down to Kerry's anti-war behavior in the 70's. My dad was back from Vietnam in '65 and then taught kids at the Air Force Academy who then went off to serve. He still remembers Kerry from back then.

[Helms]

Multiple Choice George Soros Pop Quiz (choose one):

Which of the following has George Soros NOT said:

A) Postmodernism has gone too far

B) Al Gore would make a great Ambassador

C) Fox News is an Orwellian Truth machine

D) Abu Garab and 9-11 were similar

E) I am in a desperate search for a World Class Legacy before advancing age catches up with me

[Not A Snowbird]

Well, he is only the PRESUMPTIVE candidate.

LOL! Excellent point.

[MoodyBlu]

I have my rather large Bush/Cheney 2004 yard sign in an upstairs window so vandals can't target it.

I have a very wet, low area in my front yard. I am going to place my Bush/Cheney sign in the middle of the area and if someone wants to mess with it, they will have mud up to their ankles!

MoodyBlu

[Republic]

Girl................my gosh! (Sound is off on our puter...everytime I see one of your posts I feel the pain of this! But Mia..........the graphics! WOW!)

Will be getting back to you when we get this mess cleared up.

[TheSpottedOwl]

Just yesterday, my son in law who is a democrat, said he wasn't voting.

I mentioned to him that Kerry is the presumptive candidate, not the official one yet. I asked him should a certain someone get the nod, if he would reconsider and vote for Bush.

[MeekOneGOP]

Click here for Poodle Boy!

Just a gigolo

[malia]

Not to get personal - but - why is your dad a liberal? What is it in the Democrat party that draws your dad?

My very favorite people, my younger brother and his wife, are also liberal or democrats. They both teach, middle and high school, are of the Vietnam era. My brother was in the lottery time. They only voted for clinton the first time. They think McCain is brain damaged. Will probably vote for Kerry because of President Bush, but would really want to vote for Nader.

[Helms]

When I saw him speak at Duke U. he did not use the Animal Farm simile but he did refer to Fox News as a Ministry of Truth. This is all enough for me to consider him an Enemy.

This Cat is something else. Sir Karl Popper would unlikely endorse his turning his "Open Society and Its Enemies, I, II" nearly upside down.

A Pomosopher indeed. The unquenchable "Will to Power" is more like the operative explanation.

[Republican Red]

One of the great mysteries of life. Can't answer why my dad is a liberal. He really is not the type. Career military and made himself a success all on his own. He once said he was voting democratic because the democrats will take of him in his old age.

He is sort of retired from teaching but decided to teach a community college course for fun. A young kid wore his baseball cap into class. My dad told him to take the hat off. The kid refused. My dad threw him out. The kid went straight to the college President to tattle. The college president showed the kid my dad's resume, including Air Force Academy, Penn St and Johns Hopkins. The kid called my dad at home and apologized. The kid has never worn his cap in class again. Doesn't sound like a liberal teacher to me.

Maybe he's liberal because he grew up quite poor and quite sickly (polio). He was actually given up for foster care during WW2 because my grandfather was away in the war and my grandmother was too poor to care for him.

[Mia T]

A Vote for Kerry is a Vote for the Terrorists

[Mia T]

A Vote for Kerry is a Vote for the Terrorists

by Mia T, 6.08.04

For the better part of 18 months, John Kerry has bitterly denounced the Bush administration's conduct of international relations, above all in Iraq.  Over and over he has pronounced his unsparing indictment: "George Bush has pursued the most arrogant, inept, reckless, and ideological foreign policy in the modern history of this country."
 
That is remarkably hostile language for a presidential challenger.  No major party candidate for the White House in modern times has so thoroughly abandoned the principle that politics stops at the water's edge.
 
On the other hand, voters clearly benefit when candidates articulate their differences, and make plain what is at stake on Election Day.  After 18 months of honing his anti-Bush message, Kerry should be able to outline his alternative foreign policy with crystal clarity.  He should have no trouble laying out a comprehensive vision for Iraq and the Middle East and explaining why it is superior to Bush's.
 
So why doesn't he do so?
 
...No matter how the question is put, Kerry's answers on Iraq always boil down to a single recipe: Shrink the US role in Iraq and defer to the United Nations instead.  That's it.  That is the sum and substance of his thinking about Iraq.  He doesn't relate it to the war on terrorism, to the future of liberty in the Middle East, to America's national interests.  He repeatedly declares Bush a failure for not kowtowing to the UN and vows that in a Kerry administration, the UN will be given the commanding role it deserves.
 
Kerry has been talking this way for months.  In his speech on Iraq at the Brookings Institution last fall, for example, he mentioned the UN no fewer than 25 times.  ("We need a new Security Council resolution to give the United Nations real authority in the rebuilding of Iraq. . . . This shift of authority from the United States to the United Nations is indispensable.") By contrast, he mentioned terrorism just seven times.  He mentioned freedom, democracy, and the Middle East not at all....

 
When Bush speaks about Iraq, by contrast, it is clear that he has thought the subject through and related it to his larger goals in the world... 

"The defeat of violence and terror in Iraq is vital to the defeat of violence and terror elsewhere, and vital, therefore, to the safety of the American people.  Now is the time, and Iraq is the place, in which the enemies of the civilized world are testing the will of the civilized world.  We must not waver. . . .
  

The cause of liberty and the defeat of terror vs. the cause of a more powerful UN: In this first presidential election of the post-9/11 world, that is what the choice comes down to.

Kerry's U.N. fetish
Jeff Jacoby
April 23, 2004
townhall.com

The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)

WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

by Mia T, 6.04.04

 
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

The Bush Doctine is built on two pillars, one -- that the United States must maintain its absolute military superiority in every part of the world, and second -- that the United States has the right for preemptive action.

Now, both these propositions, taken on their own, are quite valid propositions, but if you put them together, they establish two kinds of sovereignty in the world, the sovereignty of the United States, which is inviolate, not subject to any international constraints, and the rest of the world, which is subject to the Bush Doctrine.

To me, it is reminiscent to [sic] George Orwell's "Animal Farm," that "All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

George Soros

eorge Soros could not have more clearly enunciated the lethal danger that he and John Kerry and the clintons and the rest of his leftist cabal pose for America.

Yesterday, at the "progressive," i.e., ultra-extremist left-wing liberal, "Take Back America" confab, Mr. Soros confirmed the obvious: 9/11 was dispositive for the Dems; that is, 9/11 accelerated what eight years of the clintons had set into motion, namely, the demise of a Democratic party that is increasingly irrelevant, unflinchingly corrupt, unwaveringly self-serving, chronically moribund and above all, lethally, seditiously dangerous.

"All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Apparently missing the irony, George Soros chastised America with these words even as he was trying his $25,000,000, 527-end-run damnedest to render himself "more equal than others" in order to foist his radical, paranoic, deadly dementia on an entire nation.

"Animal Farm" is George Orwell's satirical allegory of the Russian Revolution; but it could just as easily be the story of the Democratic Party of today, with the

Kennedy-Pelosi-Gore-clinton (either--"one for the price of two," I say) -Sulzberger-Soros-Moore construct

its porcine manifestation.

GEORGE TSURIS

Soros' little speech reveals everything we need to know about the Left, to wit:

• its naivete about the War on Terror,
• its preference for demagoguery over rational argument, and ideology and reacquisition of power over national security,
• its mindset, which is inextricably bound to its failed, tortuous, reckless schemes, relics of a different time, a different war and a different enemy.

Soros is correct when he states that each of the two pillars of the Bush Doctine--the United States maintenance of absolute military superiority and the United States right of preemptive action--are "valid propositions" [in a post-9/11 world].

But when he proceeds from there to argue that the validity of each of these two [essential] pillars is somehow nullified by the resultant unequalled power that these two pillars, when taken together, vest in the United States, rational thought and national-security primacy give way to dogmatic Leftist neo-neoliberal ideology.

 

What is, in fact, "inviolate" here is the neo-neoliberal doctrine of U.S. sovereignty, which states simply that there must be none, that we must yield our sovereignty to the United Nations. Because this Leftist tenet is inviolate, and because it is the antithesis of the concept of U.S. sovereignty enunciated by the Bush Doctrine and the concept of U.S. sovereignty required by the War on Terror, rabid Leftists like Soros conclude that we must trash the latter two inconvenient concepts--even if critical to the survival of our country.

It is precisely here where Soros and the Left fail utterly to understand the War on Terror. They cannot see beyond their own ideology and lust for power. They have become a danger to this country no less lethal than the terrorists they aid and abet.

 

I think this administration has the right strategic vision and has taken many of the steps needed to get that long-term strategy rolling.

Where I give them the failing grade is in explaining that vision to the American public and the world. Key example: this White House enshrines preemptive war in the latest National Security Strategy and that scares the hell out of a lot of Americans, not to mention our allies. Why? This administration fails to distinguish sufficiently under what conditions that strategy makes reasonable sense.

My point is this: when you are explicit about the world being divided into globalization's Core and Gap, you can distinguish between the different security rule sets at work in each.

Nothing has changed about strategic deterrence or the concept of mutual-assured destruction (or MAD) within the Core, so fears about preemptive wars triggering World War III are misplaced.

When this administration talks about preemption, they're talking strictly about the Gap - not the Core. The strategic stability that defines the Core is not altered one whit by this new strategy, because preemption is all about striking first against actors or states you believe - quite reasonably - are undeterrable in the normal sense.

Thomas P.M. Barnett
The Pentagon's New Map
NB: Dr. Barnett is a lifelong DEMOCRAT

I'm a single-issue voter, as I guess must have become apparent.

I'm not a Republican. I'm not a conservative. I'm not a very great admirer of the president in many ways, but I think that my condition is... that this is an administration that wakes up every morning wondering how to make life hard for the forces of Jihad and how to make as hard as possible an unapologetic defense of civilization against this kind of barbarism... and though the Bush administration has been rife with disappointment on this and incompetent, I nonetheless feel that they have some sense of that spirit.

I don't get that... I don't get that feeling from anyone who even sought the Democratic nomination.

I would [therefore] have to vote for the reelection of President Bush.

Christopher Hitchens
Washington Journal, 6.01.04
C-SPAN

more

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004

 

A Vote for Kerry is a Vote for the Terrorists

sanitizing evil
Kerry Cabal Censors Nick Berg Decapitation

pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic

The Cycle of Violence:
NOW WITH HYPERLINKED INSTRUCTION MANUAL

JOHN KERRY'S RECKLESS TET-OFFENSIVE-GAMBIT REPLAY:
the left's jihad against America is killing our troops, aiding + abetting the terrorists and imperiling all Americans

nepotism + tokenism = a nancy pelosi
(or a hillary clinton)

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#3-sang-froid and the "nuclear" button

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#2-understanding the job description

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#1-making the tough choices in a post-9/11 world

Kerry's Belated Condemnation Focuses on Process
Kerry Lacks Moral Authority to Condemn Content

"CRY BUSH" + Iraqi-Prisoner "Abuse"
What are the Dems up to?

The Mary Jo White Memo:
Documentation of clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance

What is the REAL Reason for Gorelick's Wall?

Q ERTY6 ^{utter failure}_BUMP

Lib Author Regrets Voting (TWICE!) for clinton
"Sickened" by clinton's Failure to Protect America from Terrorism

MUST-READ BOOK FOR DEMOCRATS:
How clintons' Failures Unleashed Global Terror
(Who in his right mind would ever want the clintons back in the Oval Office?)

The Man Who Warned America
(Why a Rapist is Not a Fit President)

UDAY: "The end is near… this time I think the… Americans are serious, Bush is not like Clinton."

[Mia T]

bump

[jla]

^

[hunter112]

One thing occurred to me the other day, I live out in Rat country (timber community in SW WA state, should know better, but doesn't), and while I've seen Kerry bumper stickers in Olympia (Rat infested state capital) I've seen VERY few out here in the boondocks. It's not like people won't be voting for Kerry, I'm sure many, if not most, will, but I can clearly see that practically nobody in timber country will be excited about it.

I have some faint hope that Kerry will not win WA, I sure hope we dump Osama Mama Murray!

[Mia T]

bump ;)

[California Patriot]

"Does anybody support Kerry?"

Well, every poll I've ever seen says that at least
40 percent of the people do. History says the same
thing.

Instead of pretending that we live in a country full
of patriotic Reaganites, wake up and smell the coffee.
Taunts at Kerry are beside the point. Millions upon
millions of Americans are brainwashed by the Democratic
party and the "state media." The key to this election
does not lie in making jokes about Frog, although there
is always a role for humor. The key is to educate voters
about what a disaster he and his party are.

[kcvl]

John Podesta. LOL! I think he is the only person who is willing to go on talk shows and take the heat. Of course, he should be in prison along with Bill and Hillary Clinton so I guess he doesn't count.

[Bluntpoint]

A supporter of "John Kerrys" for over a half century.

[Mia T]

Did you watch the flash movie?

As the following somewhat graphic site of a Kerry voter suggests, 'supporting Kerry' and 'voting for Kerry' are not equivalent constructs.