Welcome
Welcome to a new blog for Kerry! I didn't have a blog for Kerry in 2004 but am delighted to jump in early for John Kerry in 2008. The nation does need a Massachusetts liberal! Please join in the discussion here and let's start talking about 2008. John Kerry gave it his best shot in 2004 and lost by the smallest of margin. We can do it if we do it together!
Bob
Bob
posted by BobsAdvice at 10:58 PM
7 Comments:
Yeah! Kerry '08! Hillary for Veep!
Make Michael Moore their campaign manager!
This born-again Christian would love to see that!
We just might stop the real bloodshed that's disgracing our land--abortion (averaging 3,000 murder victims a day)!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I feel like I have arrived! The blog has been christened with an anti-abortion post! Thank goodness for the Evangelical Christians! Unfortunately for them, John Kerry will hold the line on those that wish to take back reproductive rights from Women. The same moral voters who seem quite comfortable with Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo of this Administration, desire to invade the privacy of a woman and her physician who must ultimately make the important decisions regarding a pregnancy together.
Just another good reason to be supporting John Kerry in 2008.
Bob
MacDaddy,
Thanks for participating here on the blog.
I received your email and invite other bloggers to answer your comments as well.
You wrote that you "held your nose and supported him." None of the Kerry supporters I knew were holding their noses. They viewed the choice between Kerry and Bush as a "no-brainer". Except the "no-brainer" won.
You echo the Republican websites talking about flip-flopping and ambivalence. Did you ever read about the $87 billion vote? Do you realize that all of the Republicans first voted AGAINST the $87 billion before voting FOR the $87 billion. That all of the Senators were "flip-flopping" as you put it. Because THAT is the nature of politics. That sometimes you vote against things because of Amendments and sometimes you vote for things...without the amendments?
I agree that John Kerry could have been harder on the President about Iraq. But he was fed the same LIES as all of the other Senators. Haven't you heard about all of the visits between Dick Cheney and the CIA and how all of the information was influenced by this President?
And cutting the deficit? All John Kerry was promising to do was to deal with the economy as Bill Clinton did. By working to stimulate growth with middle class tax cuts and not for the top 1%. In fact he was workingt with Robert Rubin, the architect of the Clinton program to do exactly that. We know what Bush has been doing with the deficit. Wasn't it time to give Kerry and the Democrats a chance?
Your claims of being a Kerry supporter in 2004 stretch my credulity.
John Kerry was and is right on Defense, Stem Cell Research, Space Exploration, Social Security, Public Education, Separation of Church and State, Women's Rights, Judicial Appointments, and protection of the Environment. Your smears are words I have heard before. They won't work so well in 2008.
Good luck and you are welcome to post here anytime.
Bob
Thanks again for participating here!
I do not intend to debate you point for point. Does Senator Kerry have any faults? Can I find anything to criticize him? You bet I can.
I just feel that he is still the best candidate for the Presidency for 2008. Maybe we just need to let Kerry be Kerry.
Who do you find that is preferable to him?
Bob
I agree that Democrat voters might well benefit from moving to the middle in terms of winning elections. Warner and various others would stand a good chance of being elected. But he would sinply be Repblican lite, much like Bill Clinton was. Clinton was basically a free trading, budget balancing, wellfare reforming conservative. Not all of that is bad, but when you consider that by 2008 we will have had a Republican president for 20 out of 28 years, the fact that Clinton was conservative is bad, because basically we will have 30 years of Republican rule. Prior to Clinton Democrats were viewed as the party of working men. Many people still feel this way, but thanks to Clinton the line between the two parties has been blurred. Kerry would have struck a major blow for labor in this country and I think that he deserves another shot. He has solid funding and recieved 55 million votes in 2004. THe religious right won't show up in droves again in 2008, especially if a certain pro-choice mayor from New York gets the nomination. I think that if Kerry gets 55 million next time around he will win it.
Anonymous,
Thanks for the comments.
I believe that as this second term of this Administration rolls out, more and more Americans will wonder whether the nation might just have made a mistake in the 2004 elections!
Some candidates are only good for one attempt at higher office.
John Kerry is a fighter. He didn't get wounded badly as Al Gore did, who apparently needed to retrench after his failed attempt. John Kerry dusted himself off and kept on going.
I am confident that he will be a strong candidate in 2008! He really wasn't even on the map this time during the 2004 election cycle. Everything was about Howard Dean.
I believe that most Americans who voted for Kerry would be willing to give him another chance. I also believe that many who voted for the Republicans are sure to be having second thoughts as we as a nation get bogged down in Iraq, in a more and more Vietnam-like war.
Bob
Post a Comment
<< Home