AutoJC Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 "You know, I called a couple of times to overzealous speechwriters and said 'Look, that's not what I'm saying.' Benedict Arnold does not refer to somebody who in the normal course of business is going to go overseas and take jobs overseas. That happens. I support that. I understand that. I was referring to the people who take advantage of noneconomic transactions purely for tax purposes sham transactions and give up American citizenship. That's a Benedict Arnold. You give up your American citizenship but you want to continue to do business." Riiiiiiiiiiight! Yup. Blame The Speechwriters. Check out those precious comments regarding Middle East envoys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadCap Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 I think it was Jay Leno who noted: 'If John Kerry is elected, he will be the first president in history who can give the State of the Union address AND its rebuttal.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y_feldblum Posted May 11, 2004 Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 And that will be the first Civil War of the Speechwriters in history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AutoJC Posted May 11, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2004 And that will be the first Civil War of the Speechwriters in history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidV Posted July 5, 2004 Report Share Posted July 5, 2004 Just saw this on Druge:Kerry Says He Believes Life Starts at Conception …so abortion is murder, but it should be legal anyway - is that how it works? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalism Forever Posted July 5, 2004 Report Share Posted July 5, 2004 …so abortion is murder, but it should be legal anyway - is that how it works? Sure. Senator Kerry will vote for it before he votes against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshRyan Posted July 5, 2004 Report Share Posted July 5, 2004 While Kerry's personal anti-abortion moral stance does not speak well for him, his reasons for his pro-choice political position do: "I can't take my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist," he continued in the interview. "We have separation of church and state in the United States of America." If you're going to criticize Kerry, why not at least do so on one of the plentiful issues for which he deserves it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearmint Posted July 6, 2004 Report Share Posted July 6, 2004 While Kerry's personal anti-abortion moral stance does not speak well for him, his reasons for his pro-choice political position do: If you're going to criticize Kerry, why not at least do so on one of the plentiful issues for which he deserves it? In CF's defence, Kerry's position here is _terrible_. How can you rationally maintain that you consider abortion to be murder, but that you have no right to stop others from carrying it out? If you honestly believed that thousands of innocent babies were being brutually murdered every year, on what grounds could you defend refusing to take action to remedy this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshRyan Posted July 6, 2004 Report Share Posted July 6, 2004 In CF's defence, Kerry's position here is _terrible_. How can you rationally maintain that you consider abortion to be murder, but that you have no right to stop others from carrying it out? If you honestly believed that thousands of innocent babies were being brutually murdered every year, on what grounds could you defend refusing to take action to remedy this? Because he recognizes that his personal anti-abortion moral position (if it really is his position) is based on faith, and on those grounds is not properly enforceable by government. Seeing as how most politicians are men of faith (because most of the population in general is), I wish that more of them would take such a position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aynfan Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 on those grounds is not properly enforceable by government.To conclude that Kerry understands this argument is absurb. If had an inkling about what constituted appropriate government, he would not be a collectivist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshRyan Posted July 8, 2004 Report Share Posted July 8, 2004 To conclude that Kerry understands this argument is absurb. If had an inkling about what constituted appropriate government, he would not be a collectivist. Kerry may be inconsistent, but since there is such a thing as compartmentalization, that does not mean that he does not understand the principle of separation of church and state. On the contrary, the quote I posted here from that article indicates that he understands it pretty well. Which is more than one can say for Bush. Still, your point that Kerry is a collectivist is very true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearmint Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 Because he recognizes that his personal anti-abortion moral position (if it really is his position) is based on faith, and on those grounds is not properly enforceable by government. Seeing as how most politicians are men of faith (because most of the population in general is), I wish that more of them would take such a position. If abortion is murder, then outlawing it would certainly lie under the jurisdiction of government. I'm not sure how you can claim that 'abortion is murder' while also holding that 'the state has no right to stop abortion'. A Christian's belief that theft is wrong is often based upon faith - does this mean that they should oppose its prohibition too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshRyan Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 ...A Christian's belief that theft is wrong is often based upon faith - does this mean that they should oppose its prohibition too? If that were their only reason for believing it, then they have no conception of natural rights, the protection of which is the only proper function of government according to the Founders of this great nation. In which case, they are unfit to govern anyway. But if you push most Christians (at least the educated ones) on this, they do not actually hold that the only reason that theft is wrong is just because God said so. Thank God this country hasn't reached that state yet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travis P. Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 But if you push most Christians (at least the educated ones) on this, they do not actually hold that the only reason that theft is wrong is just because God said so. But if you push most they do hold that the reason we have natural rights is because God gave them to us. Apart from arguing that theft (and abortion) violates these natural rights, other things you will hear are: stealing is selfish, it hurts the common good, the commandments say its wrong, etc. That Kerry thinks abortion is murder but then claims he doesn't want to "push" his beliefs on anyone, is horrible. I'm glad he's not advocating outlawing abortion, but if thats the best defense he can give, then the anti-abortion advocates will definitely win out in the long run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axiom Posted July 13, 2004 Report Share Posted July 13, 2004 You may be interested in this Brain Terminal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.