Double Standards of some Liberals
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 07-08-2004 - 1:39pm |
I was listening to the radio the other day and two men were debating in regards to Kerry. The liberal man was holding a sign that read "Kerry-a war hero"...When asked why he believed Kerry to be a war hero he explained his courage in fighting in Vietnam and that alone should qualify him as being a "war hero"...then the conservative asked him if he was going to vote for Kerry and the liberal man said "Definately!" The liberal man brought up the prisoner abuse in Iraq and how those men and women who performed those war crimes by putting underwear over these prisoners head and humiliating them were a disgrace to the country. He was then asked by the other man if he'd ever vote for any of these men or women that performed such acts down the road for President? The liberal man said "heck no". The other man went on to play a tape where Kerry himself in an interview spoke of the atrocities he and fellow militarymen participated in such as burning down Vietnam villages and other activities that were war crimes while in Vietnam. Kerry with his own words and voice admitted such things happened and do happen in a time of war no doubt about it. ( you could hear the audio tape of his interview) The man then asked the sign holding, Kerry supporting, liberal man how he could vote for someone who actually burned down and killed people in their own villages during Vietnam for President but would never consider voting for those who commited war crimes such as humliation in Iraq in the future as President? Does that make Kerry a war hero he asked? The liberal man was at a loss for words. He contradicted himself...he judged these soldiers in Iraq as a "disgrace to their country" but would vote for Kerry for President of the United States of America.
The reason for posting this story was to give a little insight on the double standards some liberals hold for their own and the mind-set the have.
Sorry so long but it's worth the read :)

Pages
From what I gather, those extreme groups are still very active, and dangerous, and they could plan a major attack under our noses.
Does that reflect badly upon YOU, or on person A? Doesn't it say how strongly you feel about person A? Haven't we all made choices occasionally that would fit the definition of 'anything BUT', even for major life choices? Again, not to say we should make uninformed choices, but sometime the 'information' we use is information about what we DONT'T want, not just information about what we pick. Process of elimination...
;)
I agree with you, but the Bush administration is so radical, that this election is almost a no-brainer. If you are against holding US citizens without charges, secret courts, torture as a legally cleared intelligence tool, military aggression as a first resort, violating the Geneva Convention and tampering with the constitution, then even the most casual look at John Kerry's positions will tell you, you'd better vote Democrat. Who else are you gonna vote for? I think that foreign policy and the War on Terror trump all this year. Nobody's going to say "Well, I like Bush's health care plan better, so I guess I can put up with having zero credibility in the eyes of the world, and doing nothing at all about real threats like North Korea."
And anyone who takes the time to find out more about John Kerry would discover he's extrememly well qualified to be commander in chief during a time of war, and has experience particularly suited to the complicated WOT. As a four term senator, he's very familiar with the intelligence community (which will undergo a major overhaul during the next presidential term) and well versed in the international problems we face. As a former naval officer and Vietnam veteran he has a hands on understanding of the military, and as a former war protester, he understands the pandora's box that using force can become. His skills as a diplomat helped the US reopen ties with our former enemy - Vietnam. He's served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for 18 years. As a lawyer he understands and respects the rule of law and it's centra tenents such as habeus corpus. Early in his law career successfully fought against organized crime, an entity whose structure and operations have been closely compared to that of al Qaeda. He also pushed back against government stonewalling to investigate and expose the massive BCCI scandal, the largest international bank fraud ever and a tangle of funding for illegal arms, drugs, terrorism, and nuclear technology trafficing. You'd be hard pressed to find someone better suited to getting us back on course in the WOT.
Your sentence sums it up perfectly and many people feel, or are beginning to feel, the same way.
Thank you for your entire post, well said!
Renee ~~~
Renee ~~~
Pages