The performance of both was depressing. What I found incomprehensible were the news commentators who talked about what an excellent debater Kerry was. He continually failed to finish sentences he started, going off on tangents. It was like watching a tennis match using a square ball - you never knew which way it would fly, if at all. The virtual absense of any direct, simple answers to any questions made the whole thing confusing. I kept thinking about the stunning lucidity and focus of Kucinich in the early debates. Of course, he had no prayer, being intelligent and honest. Who was it that said that we get the government we deserve? I'm beginning to think I have to repent for my entire life if I deserve this.
The non-answer about mistakes doesn't surprise me -- this is the same guy who couldn't finish "fool me once, shame on you" because he's unable to force out the words "shame on me" even hypothetically.
Well, actually, I think the world should have done something about the Taliban when they destroyed all the Buddhas. We can't yet hold up Afghanistan as a convincing example of "Mission Accomplished", of course.
Although I agree that the Buddhas were valuable archeological and religious artifacts, I think it would set an unacceptable precident for armed intervention in a soveriegn nation to invade based on religious differences.
No, going after the Taliban because they hosted Bin Laden is legitimate because Bin Laden orchistrated a major attack on the US. But, other than that sort of circumstance (which had incidentally been punished with sanctions for many many years prior to military action), invasion and wholesale government toppling based on popular opinion that they are "bad," is a really really bad idea.
I think it would set an unacceptable precident for armed intervention in a soveriegn nation to invade based on religious differences.
It's not a matter of religious differences. The sort of fundamentalism that dynamites a 1600-year-old statue because a 1400-year-old book prohibits it... this must be recognized as insanity. (I think all religion is basically a form of mental illness, but at least in much of the West, it has decayed to little more than what the British would tolerate as charming eccentricity.)
going after the Taliban because they hosted Bin Laden is legitimate because Bin Laden orchistrated a major attack on the US.
If this is a self-defense argument, it's a pretty weak one. I'll assume you wanted to say something stronger than "hosted".
government toppling based on popular opinion that they are "bad," is a really really bad idea.Is the opinion of the CIA or the UN a substantially better basis for such an action
( ... )
And what was the deal with Kerry's rambling answer to "will my tax dollars be used to 'support' abortion?"... does he really believe that he displeases the fewest voters with such a vague, meandering, apologetic response? What's wrong with saying "abortions are medical care, and government should help equalize access to medical care, and by the way, the global gag rule is counterproductive"? He really does makes it easy for the Bush camp to paint him as wishy-washy. I thought you believed people should pay their own way in medical expences. Isn't that why you don't have insurance
( ... )
Comments 25
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
No, going after the Taliban because they hosted Bin Laden is legitimate because Bin Laden orchistrated a major attack on the US. But, other than that sort of circumstance (which had incidentally been punished with sanctions for many many years prior to military action), invasion and wholesale government toppling based on popular opinion that they are "bad," is a really really bad idea.
Reply
It's not a matter of religious differences. The sort of fundamentalism that dynamites a 1600-year-old statue because a 1400-year-old book prohibits it... this must be recognized as insanity. (I think all religion is basically a form of mental illness, but at least in much of the West, it has decayed to little more than what the British would tolerate as charming eccentricity.)
going after the Taliban because they hosted Bin Laden is legitimate because Bin Laden orchistrated a major attack on the US.
If this is a self-defense argument, it's a pretty weak one. I'll assume you wanted to say something stronger than "hosted".
government toppling based on popular opinion that they are "bad," is a really really bad idea.Is the opinion of the CIA or the UN a substantially better basis for such an action ( ... )
Reply
I thought you believed people should pay their own way in medical expences. Isn't that why you don't have insurance ( ... )
Reply
I don't have insurance because it's a net loss for me. Other people can buy all the insurance they want.
I'm not complaining about Kerry's positions here, just his lousy articulation of them.
Reply
Leave a comment