I believe in John Kerry Options

[Druid]

I believe the senator. I have always believed him. I believed him when he said he supported the war in Iraq, and I believe him now when he says he was against it. I believed him when he said he would take care of our troops regardless, and I believe him now when he says he was only showing them just how much he cares by voting to cut off their funding when the going got rough. I believed him when he said he was caught in the crossfire in Cambodia in 1968 and I believe him now, when he reportedly admits he wasn't.

I believed the senator when he said every last detail of that blue Cambodian Christmas was “seared” into his brain, and I believe him now when he says he’s not quite sure if his recollection of that blessed event is solid. And I most certainly believed him when he testified before the transparently non-partisan Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971, swearing America made him commit horrific but strategically needful acts, like hunting down cattle and dogs for sport. I believe the senator and his fellow Vietnam Veterans Against the War were motivated by nothing but patriotism and love for their vile country.

I believe the senator’s totally unsolicited television appearance on the Dick Cavett show in April 1971 was in truth doctored, even then, by the radical right-wing Carlyle cabal, operating in concert with the Saudi royal family, the CIA, and the reactionary conservative media conglomerate, News Corp. I believe in a secret, subterranean, centralized corporate authority.

I believe in the Kerry standard of adherence to the First Amendment, enunciated by the senator in his formal complaint to the FCC accusing the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the Bush campaign of illegally conspiring to discredit him--a standard which holds that censorship is okay so long as it acts to suppress speech in instances where there exists "overwhelming evidence [of] coordination with the Bush campaign." I note with appreciation the senator’s use of the word “overwhelming.” I believe the senator when he says there is no evidence of any similar coordination between his own campaign and MoveOn.org.

I believe the senator when he says Bush’s attorney, Benjamin Ginsberg, is clearly in bed with special interests, and I believe him when he says his own lawyer, Joe Sandler, clearly is not. I believe counselors like Ginsberg who represent campaigns, parties, and soft groups simultaneously are all acting illegally, even though the law and the FEC declare they aren’t. I agree with the senator that all lawyers working in conjunction with the Bush reelection team and the SBVT are automatically suspect, and I agree with him, too, that counselors representing the DNC and their sludge funds are by default not even remotely fishy.

I believe the senator has the right to criticize his country, just as I believe VVAW had the right to criticize it, too. And I believe the senator now has the right to force John O’Neill to abrogate his right to criticize the senator, just as I believe the SBVT should be forced to abrogate its right to criticize the senator, too. I believe those sixty-some-odd veterans who signed affidavits are all lying, just as I believe the senator and his massive army of eight are the only ones telling the truth.

I believe the senator is being sincere when he lauds Michael Moore, whom he thinks should never be censored, and I believe he’s being sincere, too, when he denounces Paul Galanti, whom he thinks must be. I believe the senator is being sincere when he condemns as illicit the $17 million in 527 and 501 soft money the Bush campaign has raised thus far, and I believe he’s being sincere when he condones the $186 million his own campaign has to date accumulated by these same unquestionably above-board means.

I believe the senator when he says he favors a strong national defense, and I believe he was in fact actively strengthening our nation’s defenses throughout the 1990s by systematically hacking military and intelligence budgets to bits, and by voting to slay every single major weapons system that ever dared lumber across the Senate floor.

I see nothing suspicious in the report that the senator was awarded the Purple Heart for sustaining mortal scratches etched by whizzing bullets on December 2, 1968, even though he wrote in his journal a full nine days later, on December 11, that he and his crew in the Viet Cong had not yet “been shot at.” I believe the Purple Heart was similarly bestowed upon every rice-paddy warrior, who, like John Forbes Kerry, suffered self-inflicted, practically lethal nicks, cuts, and bruises, and I believe, too, that the Bronze Star and other medals of valor are routinely granted for knee scrapes.

[Druid]

Blakjak I'll give you an A for effort.
A few things to clarify.
I was never a big supporter of the tax cuts.
I may be wrong but I don't think they ever drew a direct connection to Saddam and OBL. Saddam was more about 18 U.N. Resolutions over 12 years which where never met and lots of faulty intelligence not only from us but also 6 or 7 allies.
I never supported "No child left behind", for that matter I want the federal government 100% completely out of the school system.
I can't argue with the environmental stuff because I don't pay attention to it.
On the other hand when it comes to opening the forrest up, most experts agreed it was needed. Last year alone we lost between 6 and 7 million acres to forrest fires. He opened up these areas to selective clear cutting for the simple purpose of preventing fires. Several polls showed the majority of the people in the affected areas supported this.

As for bashing on Kerry for his Vietnam record. I'm only doing that because he made it center piece of his campaign.
Just for you here are a few more recent ones.
Kerry recently begun accusing Bush of rushing to war for the wrong reasons at the wrong time and without building a real coalition. It's funny he would talk about how he would build a real coalition before going to war. The Gulf war was the single largest coalition ever made ( France even supported it ). Well Kerry still voted against it.
When Kerry was asked on Face the nation if he would vote for the $87 Billion his reply was ""I don't think any United States senator is going to abandon our troops and recklessly leave Iraq to whatever follows as a result of simply cutting and running. That's irresponsible." and " I don't think anyone in the Congress is going to not give our troops ammunition, not give our troops the ability to be able to defend themselves. We're not going to cut and run and not do the job, such a vote would be reckless, irresponsible, and tantamount to abandoning U.S. troops.
"
A few weeks later that is exactly what he did.

I was talking to a friend of mine a few days ago who is a big Kerry supporter, he said it will be all over once the debates happen because Kerry will blow bush away.
We now have a twenty dollar bet on who gets a boost in the polls after the debates.
Kerry is 10 times a better speaker but Bush will only have to bring up Kerry's senate voting record to contradict 90% of what Kerry says and his stance on the issues.