Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Well, this makes voting for Kerry a whole lot harder.



( 43 comments — Leave a comment )
Feb. 26th, 2004 01:44 pm (UTC)
There's a big difference between the Mass Constitution, which he wants to amend to say yes to civil unions and give the same rights, and the Federal Constitution of the US, which he opposes.
Feb. 26th, 2004 03:23 pm (UTC)
I recognize the difference; I just feel passionately that civil unions isn't good enough.
Feb. 26th, 2004 01:45 pm (UTC)
if he's the candidate against bush, i'll vote for him pretty much no matter what. that's a site i had never seen before, btw. thanks for the link.
Mar. 1st, 2004 05:51 am (UTC)
"The" candidate against Bush?

Right. Because there are only two choices. I forgot.
Feb. 26th, 2004 01:49 pm (UTC)

Yeah, your going to see a lot of middle of the road type opinions coming out of Kerry... he's already got the 'anyone but Bush' vote, so he's going to concentrate on promoting 'moderate' positions to win over the swing vote.
Feb. 26th, 2004 01:59 pm (UTC)
Hence my tendency to bitch. The parties aren't all that different. Read his voting record. Outside of defense, he and Bush are almost the same guy.
Feb. 26th, 2004 02:09 pm (UTC)
But, said the Massachusetts senator, he would only support the state amendment if it provides for civil unions and allows same-sex couples all of the rights of marriage.

Okay, this is why I wish a magic fairy could come along overnight and make it so people who weren't rich, dyed-in-the-wool politicians had a realistic chance at elected office in this country.

Alternately, the magic fairy would disband every poll-taking organization in the country.

Politicians - and oh boy is John Kerry ever one - aren't "statesmen" (statespersons!) anymore. They're number-crunchers. Polls say, 60-some percent of all Americans oppose gay marriage. If John Kerry were to stand up, allow his lungs to fill with proudly Massachusetts-liberal air, and say "I fully support the right of all adult citizens in this country to marry whomsoever they choose in the full light and approval of The Law," boom, he would lose 60-something percent of the country. And we'd have another four years of Bush presidency.

Who knows what John Kerry would say in a closed room with no reporters and no wiretaps and no windows, to someone he trusted, if asked about gay marriage? Only Theresa knows, probably. And she is keeping her 57-varieties mouth shut about it, surely.

Edwards has said outright that he doesn't personally approve of gay marriage but does not think there should be a U.S. Constitutional amendment forbidding it. That's pretty much the Dem party line on it, I'd say. I am unsure of Edwards' stance on civil unions. A quick glance at his webpage didn't lead me to any statements on civil unions.
Feb. 26th, 2004 02:51 pm (UTC)
Oh, Teresa Kerry is so NOT keeping her mouth shut. That's just not her style. She has been known to correct her husband's speeches, and she does not hesitate to disagree with him in public. Just Tuesday, she was saying that she thought the United States would eventually come to accept gay marriage. I think that the guy does earn some points for marrying a woman who isn't afraid to speak her mind, even at the risk of contradicting him.
(no subject) - bizarrojack - Feb. 26th, 2004 04:38 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - examorata - Feb. 27th, 2004 07:23 am (UTC) - Expand
... - professorbooty - Mar. 1st, 2004 05:53 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - snidegrrl - Feb. 26th, 2004 03:26 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - examorata - Feb. 27th, 2004 07:25 am (UTC) - Expand
Feb. 26th, 2004 02:17 pm (UTC)
"But, said the Massachusetts senator, he would only support the state amendment if it provides for civil unions and allows same-sex couples all of the rights of marriage."

i suppose its a start
Feb. 26th, 2004 03:29 pm (UTC)
I have that in my mind... but I know too many activists to really be mollified by that thought for long.
(no subject) - bizarrojack - Feb. 26th, 2004 04:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
... - professorbooty - Mar. 1st, 2004 05:54 am (UTC) - Expand
Feb. 26th, 2004 02:51 pm (UTC)
What's Edwards's stance? (I'm too lazy to look it up)
Feb. 26th, 2004 04:37 pm (UTC)
He disapproves of gay marriages but has said he has no interest in legislation to ban them.
(no subject) - mpeg2tom - Feb. 26th, 2004 05:34 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bizarrojack - Feb. 26th, 2004 09:20 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mpeg2tom - Feb. 26th, 2004 10:15 pm (UTC) - Expand
... - professorbooty - Mar. 1st, 2004 05:56 am (UTC) - Expand
Feb. 26th, 2004 03:18 pm (UTC)
You don't have to, since you live in Maryland. Gore won last time with 56%, and the state hasn't gone Repub. since the Reagan landslide in 1984.
Feb. 26th, 2004 03:28 pm (UTC)
This fact is always in the back of my mind, as well. I haven't said I won't vote for Kerry; I will say that it would be a lie to say he's the president I want.
(no subject) - bizarrojack - Feb. 26th, 2004 04:36 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - snidegrrl - Feb. 27th, 2004 10:06 am (UTC) - Expand
woops, there it is in black and white - bizarrojack - Feb. 27th, 2004 10:21 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: woops, there it is in black and white - snidegrrl - Feb. 27th, 2004 10:41 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cheetahmaster - Feb. 26th, 2004 10:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
... - professorbooty - Mar. 1st, 2004 05:58 am (UTC) - Expand
Feb. 26th, 2004 03:50 pm (UTC)

wow. fuck him, i'm not voting for him. that self-important, smug little pig should have opposed the constitutional amendment and then kept his mouth shut. looks the democrats are screwing it up, *again*.
Feb. 26th, 2004 04:35 pm (UTC)
Well, in my primary, I voted fro Kucinich -- who is awesome by the way -- and he as a real chance of winning in Ohio -- which may set a new precedent for future primaries... but you never know.. But after all, they said March 2 is "big tuesday" so theres still time to get the word out about kucinich or sharpton or whoever you support
Feb. 27th, 2004 10:08 am (UTC)
Kucinich and Moseley-Braun were always my favorites.

The rest of the Dems sound more and more like watered-down republicans oh, I mean, "moderates" every day.
... - professorbooty - Mar. 1st, 2004 06:03 am (UTC) - Expand
Feb. 26th, 2004 06:53 pm (UTC)
The gay marriage issue is a bit of a red herring. I don't care either way. Just remember more Americans were killed on Sept 11 than were at Pearl Harbor and that Kerry has voted AGAINST EVERY defense bill that has come up since he went to the Senate.
Feb. 26th, 2004 06:55 pm (UTC)
No, do not be disappointed.

The issue of gay marriage only has relevance on the federal level because the GOP is making it that way. Betting on the reluctance of many democrat voters to support gay marriage, the idea behind the GOP's introduction of the topic to the federal scene was to a.) attract morally conservative democrats, and b.) to force the democrats to take a stance that could alienate them from some segment of the voting public, and thus hurt their chances to usurp Bush. Because the GOP knows its coming. If the dems' major candidate supported gay marriage, then a line would be drawn, gay marriage would become an election issue, and getting Bush out of office would be even more difficult. Taking a moderately oppositional stance on the topic reduces the difference between candidates by one degree. In this case, we need the candidates to be as alike as possible . . . because once the other differences have been washed away, there is still the problem of Bush's misconduct on the international scene. Kerry, being more or less innocent of this business, definitely opposes Bush there, and would be able to ride

After the election, chances are that Kerry will revert to a less moderate stance, just like Bush did.
Feb. 27th, 2004 10:13 am (UTC)
After the election, chances are that Kerry will revert to a less moderate stance, just like Bush did.

I hope you are right. I am too cynical.
(no subject) - tomorrow_devil - Feb. 27th, 2004 10:53 am (UTC) - Expand
... - professorbooty - Mar. 1st, 2004 06:05 am (UTC) - Expand
Feb. 26th, 2004 08:44 pm (UTC)
Wow, 1,049 federal marriage priveleges. I wonder if they have a list somewhere...
Feb. 26th, 2004 09:25 pm (UTC)
that looks kinda funky to me, as well. I didnt say anything because I was satisfied with 2 or 3.
... - professorbooty - Mar. 1st, 2004 06:08 am (UTC) - Expand
( 43 comments — Leave a comment )


keep it dark

Latest Month

February 2009
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner