Eminent Domain Stuff
New London Update (2/24/06)
Bad NLDC!
Coverage of the Rally at New London's City Hall (w/ pics)
Thursday, July 29, 2004
Dean's Question And My Pledge
Dean's World has posed a question to Conservatives. He basically wants to know, if Kerry gets (barf) elected, will we do what we have been telling the Left to do for the past 4 years. Specifically, will we refrain from calling (barf) President Kerry a "traitor, loser, liar, incompetent" etc.?
Instapundit has posted some interesting thoughts on this topic (from the comments in this post). I am somewhat torn between the commenter's opinion and the general desire to provide a unified front against our enemies. Here's what the commenter said:
I happen to believe that the old adages (which the Left has so painfully abandoned) of politics stops at the water's edge, we must stand United and all the various iterations do not exclude public disagreement with the sitting President.
Let me pose my own question: If Kerry is elected (barf) President, should I reinforce behavior with which I disagree? And further, is it possible that he might actually do something that would make him a loser, liar, incompetent or even a bona fide traitor?
Example? How about turning over our sovereignty to the UN? How about asking (on bended knee) for the permission of our masters in France, Germany and Russia before we do anything outside of our borders? Should I support such behavior in the name of providing a unified front? And, would such actions (or others) actually make him a traitor?
You see, the important thing here is not necessarily the words used (although some are just unacceptable), but whether or not the words actually apply and, as importantly, whether or not the accuser is willing to take full moral and legal responsibility for the words used.
If I call President (barf) Kerry a traitor, I damn well better be ready and willing to back that up in the most solid way possible. To do otherwise would be to assume the cloak of shame with which the Left has so odiously covered the nakedness of their hatred for President Bush.
However, whether or not anyone might ever choose to call President (barf) Kerry a traitor, it is never acceptable to do so in a foreign country. If you want to challenge the President of the United States, you damn will better be doing it in this country. Otherwise you're at best a wimp and at worst a traitor.
So, I will take a pledge right now:
I, Tom at MuD&PHuD, do hereby pledge that I will not directly insult President (barf) Kerry (although I reserve the right to make fun of him in good humor and disagree on any topic). Further, I pledge to never enter a Foreign Country, stand in front of a crowd of any size, and call President (barf) Kerry anything other than my President while extolling any virtues of his with which I agree.
|
Instapundit has posted some interesting thoughts on this topic (from the comments in this post). I am somewhat torn between the commenter's opinion and the general desire to provide a unified front against our enemies. Here's what the commenter said:
Aren't you basically saying that Republicans can be counted on to support the country and the WoT if a Democrat is in office, but not vice versa? This argument lets the Democrats who would rather control the White House than have the U.S. remain safe and secure off the hook. Not a good precedent. Rather Kerry and the Democratic party should be punished for undermining Bush and creating the division in the country, not rewarded!True (and I personally think they will be punished...at the polls in November, but I digress). All the same, we Conservatives have a choice (if Kerry were to (barf) win). We can either become just like our Liberals "friends" (the ones who liken Bush to Hitler, and hence our "friends"), or we can maintain the high ground and (wonder of wonders) challenge President (barf) Kerry with (now get this) actual ideas.
I happen to believe that the old adages (which the Left has so painfully abandoned) of politics stops at the water's edge, we must stand United and all the various iterations do not exclude public disagreement with the sitting President.
Let me pose my own question: If Kerry is elected (barf) President, should I reinforce behavior with which I disagree? And further, is it possible that he might actually do something that would make him a loser, liar, incompetent or even a bona fide traitor?
Example? How about turning over our sovereignty to the UN? How about asking (on bended knee) for the permission of our masters in France, Germany and Russia before we do anything outside of our borders? Should I support such behavior in the name of providing a unified front? And, would such actions (or others) actually make him a traitor?
You see, the important thing here is not necessarily the words used (although some are just unacceptable), but whether or not the words actually apply and, as importantly, whether or not the accuser is willing to take full moral and legal responsibility for the words used.
If I call President (barf) Kerry a traitor, I damn well better be ready and willing to back that up in the most solid way possible. To do otherwise would be to assume the cloak of shame with which the Left has so odiously covered the nakedness of their hatred for President Bush.
However, whether or not anyone might ever choose to call President (barf) Kerry a traitor, it is never acceptable to do so in a foreign country. If you want to challenge the President of the United States, you damn will better be doing it in this country. Otherwise you're at best a wimp and at worst a traitor.
So, I will take a pledge right now:
I, Tom at MuD&PHuD, do hereby pledge that I will not directly insult President (barf) Kerry (although I reserve the right to make fun of him in good humor and disagree on any topic). Further, I pledge to never enter a Foreign Country, stand in front of a crowd of any size, and call President (barf) Kerry anything other than my President while extolling any virtues of his with which I agree.
|
