Quote:
|
Originally Posted by LINittanyLion Sorry, but fuck no. Any man who sells out his fellow soldiers in his platoon deserves no place at the head of this country.
Bush is awful, I'm not arguing that. But you judge a man based on his convictions, past and morals. Despite them being bad decisions, I honestly feel that Bush has thought he was doing what was best for this country with each decision made. I'm not so sure I can say that with Kerry. I think it would have been more of a what's best for Kerry situation, rather than a what's best for this country.
We should've elected Badnarik anyways. |
If we're judging people based on their past, then personally I'd rather have someone with a conscience who served honorably in war and then later objected to the atrocities of Vietnam as opposed to some drunken frat boy who never had the balls to go.
That being said, I think it's pretty dumb when the past (so far removed) of either politician was brought up during the election. Bush is obviously not an alcoholic anymore and Kerry hasn't been marching in any anti-war rallies. I think back to the person I was 30 years ago and... well.. actually I wasn't a person 30 years ago... but even 10 years ago I was a completely different person than the man I am today. Shockingly different.
I'm not sure I agree that Bush has always been doing what's in the country's best interest, but I'm not interested enough to argue the point. Of course it's impossible to know what decisions Kerry would have made differently, or how they would have been motivated. But I guess this whole thread is purely hypothetical...