The Two John Kerrys |
Here are the general forum rules that you must follow before you start any debate topics. Please make sure you've read and followed all directions.
The Two John Kerrys |
*CrackedRearView* |
![]()
Post
#1
|
Guest ![]() |
Article from the Kansan (University of Kansas' periodical):
John Kerry and John Edwards believe that there are two Americas. I believe that there are two John Kerrys. When you think of it in those terms, Kerry's actions make much more sense. There is a more conservative John Kerry, and then there is a very liberal John Kerry. Sometimes one of them votes, sometimes the other one votes. Sometimes one of them debates, sometimes the other one debates. Sometimes, right before our eyes, one John Kerry changes places with the other John Kerry in the middle of a speech. Its very tricky. The first John Kerry voted for the war in Iraq and made very clear that he considered Saddam Hussein a threat to national security. The second John Kerry called the Iraq war "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time." The first John Kerry used the words "kill" and "attack" in the first presidential debate because, indeed, those actions are required in the War on Terror. The second John Kerry believes that the War on Terror needs to be a more "sensitive" war. The first John Kerry said in the first presidential debate, "I'll never give a veto to any country over our security." The second John Kerry, in that same debate, said that any preemptive military action must pass "the global test," insinuating that any military action by the US must have global support or else Kerry won't do what is necessary to protect the country. The first John Kerry has said that the death penalty should be applied to terrorists. The second John Kerry has said he doesn't support the death penalty because, as he said in 2002, "I think it is worse to take somebody and put them in a small cell for the rest of their life, deprived of their freedom." The first John Kerry told a newspaper in Iowa, "I believe that life begins at conception," insinuating a Catholic, pro-life stance. The second John Kerry has been present when abortion votes have come up in the Senate during the past twenty years, and he has voted for abortion rights each and every time. The first John Kerry served in Vietnam and won several medals for his service. That is, presumably, the same John Kerry who "reported for duty" during his nomination speech at the Democratic National Convention. The second John Kerry accused Vietnam soldiers of war crimes and atrocities. That John Kerry protested the war during the 1970s and threw away combat medals in a statement against the war. The first John Kerry is a very intelligent man. The second John Kerry claimed he was in Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968, when President Richard Nixon had said that no troops were in Cambodia at that time. Not only was John Kerry not in Cambodia on Christmas Eve – he was several miles outside the border – but Lyndon B. Johnson was president at the time, not Richard Nixon. So it's apparent that there are two, often contradictory, John Kerrys. I like the first John Kerry. I think the second John Kerry has his priorities backwards. I'm sure a lot of people like the second John Kerry and dislike the first. It seems to me that the best solution is to have another primary in which the American people can vote for their favorite John Kerry, and then that Kerry can run against George W. Bush in the general election. Unfortunately, there will be no Kerry Primary. Upwards of forty percent of likely voters support John Kerry. There is a chance that Kerry could win the Presidency in 2004. But which John Kerry will take office? We won't know that until the votes are cast, the politicking is finished, and one of the two John Kerrys steps forward to be sworn in on January 20, 2005. Whichever Kerry steps forward that day, a lot of people will have been duped. |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
![]() LunchboxXx ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Member Posts: 1,789 Joined: May 2004 Member No: 16,810 ![]() |
hehehehehehehe.
maybe that's his scheme? being 2 parties? he should debate himself. it'd be funny. |
|
|
*CrackedRearView* |
![]()
Post
#3
|
Guest ![]() |
QUOTE(ryfitaDF @ Oct 9 2004, 3:23 PM) hehehehehehehe. maybe that's his scheme? being 2 parties? he should debate himself. it'd be funny. The only time we'll ever figure out that man's scheme is if he's elected into office. Guess we'll have to wait until November. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |