Skip to comments.WHY I AM SUPPORTING JOHN KERRY. Risk Management (Sullivan)
Posted on 10/26/2004 1:45:29 PM PDT by ARCADIA
click here to read article
Do you really expect anyone to read all that s**t?
He was also a Gore voter in 2000. Sullivan has a fatal flaw... total self absorption and an ability to sublimate his pet social issues to national security.
And that's why I'm voting for him. Thanks Andrew.
Bingo. He cares more about his pet issue than defending this country, IMHO.
And for what? A slightly lower tax burden, and uncontested hospital visitation privileges, and "spousal" property rights?
We all know why the last two are so important to them. They are so prone to dying early, alone, and without anyone who cares.
But public schools are teaching our children that it's just a simple lifestyle choice and the only consequences are from prejudice.
Sullivan is full of it. The absence of WMD isn't a miserable failure.
There is ample proof of both manufacture and of intent to deliver. It's as plain as the nose on people's faces.
What people evidently want is large stockpiles of nuclear material. Most of that went to Syria, along with bio/chem agents that Syria deployed in Africa not two months ago.
Iraq is a front in a larger war, and Kerry's choice of campaign strategy - to politicize what is ultimately our national strategy of fighting this conflict on their soil rather than ours - has put us all in jeopardy by sapping our resolve to take the fight where it ultimately must go - Iran and Syria.
Nothing pure and simple about WMD's not being there. Iraq was a clear and present danger that had on multiple occasions publicly expressed the intent to attack America and Americans where ever they were found. On the basis of that, we could no longer afford to wait until a threat had manifested itself materially.
We struck pre-emptively.
The justification of such action is made best by your candidate Kerry on the floor of the Senate in 2002. You can look in Rush's archive for the transcript which played today.
Sullivan's points are garbage - every last one. Sullivan hates Bush because Bush opposes gay marriage. Period.
Post 9/11 Sullivan was a big Bush fan and then flipped when Bush came out for the FMA. That's it.
If you are going to peddal liberal analysis, try peddaling Christopher Hitchens instead. Man comes out and honestly says why he differs with Bush, but sees a complete absence of resolve to do what must be done in the middle east on the left.
It's a single issue election this year, my friend. The fact that you and I are still alive to have this discussion is the issue.
My friends think I'm well-informed; that's because I review the Free Republic everyday. I also read the New York Times, the Washington Post
There is your problem. Try branching out to more balanced intellectualy honest reading materials.
Also, try Hugh Hewitt.com and read the blogs he links to.
It is telling how a lot of the posters here have not made any arguments against Sullivan except that he is gay.
Actually what is telling here is that Sullivan's arguements are suspectbecause he is rationalizing his betrayal of his supposed prinicpals over one basically trival civil issue, Gay Marrage
You have accepted Kerry as you accepted Clinton, refusing
to look beneath the surface to the dark slimy underside
which makes up both of those men.
Clinton brought you shame which you won't admit, Kerry
will bring you defeat and death, which you cannot avoid.
Fortunately, it's not up to you, WE the people could not
close our eyes to the filth and smut you and your party
have rubbed in our noses all this time, and we are going
to put a stop to it NOW.
No, he doesn't.
That's why he's treated so disdainfully.
If you'd like to defend any of his "good points", feel free to do so instead of being snide.
Who would have believed Andrew Sullivan and Christopher Hitchens reversing roles.
This is nonsense.
The intelligence agencies of France, Germany, Russia, Isreal, Jordan and virtually EVERY nation INCLUDING those opposed to the war said the SAME THING America did about the existance tof WMDs. As did the UN.
For you to claim that this is a blow to America's credibility as if nobody else was saying so is simply dishonest.
Yeah, but will he actually VOTE for him?? Don't you think he will get stomach cramps?
Shit ahoy, mate!
"The lack of stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq remains one of the biggest blows to America's international credibility in a generation".
I stopped reading right there and that sentence is absolute hogwash. International credibility?Hey Andrew why don't you do a whole expose on the U.N. Oil-For-Food Scandal??? Internatinal credibility---LMAO! (God I wish Ronald Reagan was still alive!) I have pics saved of Iraqi Fighter planes covered by monstrous piles of sand, does that mean we've found all the planes? No one considers the possibility that Saddam was 'lying, just to keep the world at bay'. He had scientists create chemical weapons to kill ( and literally test on) his own people. Those irrefutable pictures can be seen here.-----> http://www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html
Am I to believe a Lying tyrant named Saddam Hussein didn't create any more Chemical Weapons since 1988, BECAUSE WE CAN'T FIND THEM NOW????? Anyone who believes that is a simply a ninny, a kook AND a liberal. He wanted the UN Inspectors out of his country and gave them the run-around for years.Why? Why? Why is that? All we heard about for YEARS was how he harassed the inspectors after 1992.
This G.D. Liberal Dogma makes me ill and is why I don't watch the Evening News anymore. I am confident there is a special place in hell for incessant liars.