The reason(s) to vote for John Kerry, in the latest ad.
7 Responses to “The Ultimate Kerry Ad”
Brian Radzinsky
Those that are voting for Kerry because he isn’t Bush really don’t understand what an oversimplification is. And they aren’t weighing the decisions of what Kerry’s election may mean. So determined are they to get him elected that they are blind to what a Bush-less but Kerry dominated White House may mean if he swears the oath on Capitol Hill.
It is interesting to see two gays shilling ads for a president who hates them, and who has a campaign strategy of exploiting anti-gay bigotry by associating Kerry with homosexuality and femininity.
But then again you owe your jobs to right-wing billionaires. Can’t stray too far off the plantation if you know what’s good for you!
Lola’s gay bashing must be a reference to me, but I don’t know to whom else she is referring. So I’ll just respond on my own behalf to her hateful bit of gay baiting. If I offer any criticism of John Kerry (who wants to ban gay marriage and who said on national TV that he and the George Bush don’t disagree on the issue at all), is that “shilling” for another candidate? I find that very strange. I don’t disagree that Bush has used anti-gay bigotry to try to mobilize support and that is as repulsive to me as his invasion of Iraq, his imposition of tariffs on steel in order to get votes in Pennsylvania, and his support of farm subsidies in order to shore up support in agricultural states. I take positions on the basis of what I perceive to be the justice or the the wisdom behind them, not on the basis of personal identity. I support gay marriage, not because I’m gay, but because I think that it’s just. I also support legalization of narcotics, not because I use them (I don’t), but because I think it’s just. It’s too bad that some people find it too hard to think that way.
(In any case, what was interesting about the ad to which I linked above was the juxtaposition of quotations from John Kerry in which he pretty clearly took contradictory positions on important issues. Kerry seems to have no core commitments and that’s worth knowing. He’s been a free trader and a protectionist, pro-war and anti-war, etc., etc. That’s definitely worth knowing. I just listened to the ad again and I found it was entirely about the war and made no mention of homosexuality or femininity.)
In today’s political climate, it seems that some people are so overflowing with venom and hate that they can’t have a discussion of an issue without slandering others and stating that their motivations are wicked or corrupt (i/e., that someone has paid me to offer a criticism of John Kerry or of George Bush). And that’s a pity. I hope that someday Lola grows up. She might turn into a decent human being.
Tom, the gay baiting isn't coming from me, I love my people, it is coming from the DC Republican machine, which you are a supporter and paid employee of.
The ad you linked to wasn't a reasoned piece of political discourse, but a typical 527-style attack ad, a compendium of out-of-context quotations, many of them not even complete sentences, put together by a supporter of George Bush. Linking to such attack ads identifies you as someone who opposes the efforts to remove that bigoted warmongering monster from the White House.
Regarding gay issues specifically, John Kerry has been more supportive of gay rights than any other United States senator and any other man who has ever run for president. He has consistently taken the most pro-gay positions possible a competitive politician in America can take. At the moment he can't go as far as supporting equal marriage rights, but to equate the two men's position because of this is intellectually dishonest.
Gay bigots, on the other hand, are George Bush's base. Why right-wing gays like you support him, however muted and full of qualifications that support is, I cannot fathom, except as I noted before YOU HAVE BEEN PAID to criticize John Kerry, by Fred Smith, Rupert Murdoch, Charles and David Koch, and the other Bush-supporting Republican billionaires who fund the Cato Institute to which you owe your livelihood.
You're not a professor with tenure Tom, you and I both know that if you stray too far off the GOP reservation that you will get canned. I'm sorry that you are in such a position, but denying it is dishonest.
I feel sorry for you, Lola. In your mind, no one could disagree with you without having been paid to do so, because your views are so obviously correct that to deny them is to deny TRUTH itself. Hence, only the evil or the corrupt could disagree. That’s just sad.
And you’re also tied in, as people like you often are, to the “Red Team/Blue Team” mentality that has afflicted the country. You have to be 100% for or against one team, and therefore the reverse for the other. No independent thought. No ability to say, “Well, I agree with this, but disagree with that.” You’ve closed your mind. I think that if you opened it, even just a bit, you’d find that the light helps you to see things more clearly.
I just spent two weeks in San Diego, and I couldn’t help but notice how absolutely awful the talk-radio is over there. I found two stations discussing politics – one was airing “Air America” (I think that’s what it was called), which spewed Lola’s brand of hate-filled, headless chicken-like garbage, with the occasional comment about George Bush’s intellect – the other was a conservative station spewing the same garbage about the Democrats, with the occasional comment about Kerry’s appearance. Oh, and both saved some time for ‘reporting’ about the opposing candidate’s involvement with either the Saudi family, or violent anti-Vietnam groups plotting the assassination of U.S. Senators.
Neither station (or any other) talked at all about any issues, policies, etc… Is this what passes for political discussion in America? I know this is normal for TV, but here in Canada, while the TV stations show the same garbage, the radio stations actually talk about political issues, and not just politicians and conspiracy theories.
Upon leaving San Diego, I extended my list of things I will miss when I move to the U.S.
In order: 1) Canadian cigarettes
2) Rye (Canadian Blended Whisky)
3) Tim Hortons coffee
4) Real Talk-Radio
The only rational comments I heard on the radio were from DJ’s on FM stations. Sad.
Those that are voting for Kerry because he isn’t Bush really don’t understand what an oversimplification is. And they aren’t weighing the decisions of what Kerry’s election may mean. So determined are they to get him elected that they are blind to what a Bush-less but Kerry dominated White House may mean if he swears the oath on Capitol Hill.
Fabulous! Even better than http://www.footballfansfortruth.us/.
It is interesting to see two gays shilling ads for a president who hates them, and who has a campaign strategy of exploiting anti-gay bigotry by associating Kerry with homosexuality and femininity.
But then again you owe your jobs to right-wing billionaires. Can’t stray too far off the plantation if you know what’s good for you!
Lola’s gay bashing must be a reference to me, but I don’t know to whom else she is referring. So I’ll just respond on my own behalf to her hateful bit of gay baiting. If I offer any criticism of John Kerry (who wants to ban gay marriage and who said on national TV that he and the George Bush don’t disagree on the issue at all), is that “shilling” for another candidate? I find that very strange. I don’t disagree that Bush has used anti-gay bigotry to try to mobilize support and that is as repulsive to me as his invasion of Iraq, his imposition of tariffs on steel in order to get votes in Pennsylvania, and his support of farm subsidies in order to shore up support in agricultural states. I take positions on the basis of what I perceive to be the justice or the the wisdom behind them, not on the basis of personal identity. I support gay marriage, not because I’m gay, but because I think that it’s just. I also support legalization of narcotics, not because I use them (I don’t), but because I think it’s just. It’s too bad that some people find it too hard to think that way.
(In any case, what was interesting about the ad to which I linked above was the juxtaposition of quotations from John Kerry in which he pretty clearly took contradictory positions on important issues. Kerry seems to have no core commitments and that’s worth knowing. He’s been a free trader and a protectionist, pro-war and anti-war, etc., etc. That’s definitely worth knowing. I just listened to the ad again and I found it was entirely about the war and made no mention of homosexuality or femininity.)
In today’s political climate, it seems that some people are so overflowing with venom and hate that they can’t have a discussion of an issue without slandering others and stating that their motivations are wicked or corrupt (i/e., that someone has paid me to offer a criticism of John Kerry or of George Bush). And that’s a pity. I hope that someday Lola grows up. She might turn into a decent human being.
Tom, the gay baiting isn't coming from me, I love my people, it is coming from the DC Republican machine, which you are a supporter and paid employee of.
The ad you linked to wasn't a reasoned piece of political discourse, but a typical 527-style attack ad, a compendium of out-of-context quotations, many of them not even complete sentences, put together by a supporter of George Bush. Linking to such attack ads identifies you as someone who opposes the efforts to remove that bigoted warmongering monster from the White House.
Regarding gay issues specifically, John Kerry has been more supportive of gay rights than any other United States senator and any other man who has ever run for president. He has consistently taken the most pro-gay positions possible a competitive politician in America can take. At the moment he can't go as far as supporting equal marriage rights, but to equate the two men's position because of this is intellectually dishonest.
Gay bigots, on the other hand, are George Bush's base. Why right-wing gays like you support him, however muted and full of qualifications that support is, I cannot fathom, except as I noted before YOU HAVE BEEN PAID to criticize John Kerry, by Fred Smith, Rupert Murdoch, Charles and David Koch, and the other Bush-supporting Republican billionaires who fund the Cato Institute to which you owe your livelihood.
You're not a professor with tenure Tom, you and I both know that if you stray too far off the GOP reservation that you will get canned. I'm sorry that you are in such a position, but denying it is dishonest.
I feel sorry for you, Lola. In your mind, no one could disagree with you without having been paid to do so, because your views are so obviously correct that to deny them is to deny TRUTH itself. Hence, only the evil or the corrupt could disagree. That’s just sad.
And you’re also tied in, as people like you often are, to the “Red Team/Blue Team” mentality that has afflicted the country. You have to be 100% for or against one team, and therefore the reverse for the other. No independent thought. No ability to say, “Well, I agree with this, but disagree with that.” You’ve closed your mind. I think that if you opened it, even just a bit, you’d find that the light helps you to see things more clearly.
I just spent two weeks in San Diego, and I couldn’t help but notice how absolutely awful the talk-radio is over there. I found two stations discussing politics – one was airing “Air America” (I think that’s what it was called), which spewed Lola’s brand of hate-filled, headless chicken-like garbage, with the occasional comment about George Bush’s intellect – the other was a conservative station spewing the same garbage about the Democrats, with the occasional comment about Kerry’s appearance. Oh, and both saved some time for ‘reporting’ about the opposing candidate’s involvement with either the Saudi family, or violent anti-Vietnam groups plotting the assassination of U.S. Senators.
Neither station (or any other) talked at all about any issues, policies, etc… Is this what passes for political discussion in America? I know this is normal for TV, but here in Canada, while the TV stations show the same garbage, the radio stations actually talk about political issues, and not just politicians and conspiracy theories.
Upon leaving San Diego, I extended my list of things I will miss when I move to the U.S.
In order: 1) Canadian cigarettes
2) Rye (Canadian Blended Whisky)
3) Tim Hortons coffee
4) Real Talk-Radio
The only rational comments I heard on the radio were from DJ’s on FM stations. Sad.