kontiki wrote in message ...
Tom Fleischman wrote:

I have no problem with true conservatism. ...SNIP

LACK of pushing for any big government spending cuts). The fact is that
W IS doing what is needed on the terror front and is certainly much
more of a real person that Kerry is (or will ever hope to be).

Mind you, I think we've botched a lot of stuff in Iraq lately and I'm
not at all happy with GWB not speaking more directly to this. Honestly
I do wonder sometimes whther there's a pitcher of kool-aid being
passed around up there.

But, speaking as a Bostonian, I just don't believe a thing that comes
out of Kerry's mouth. Up until right after the first Gulf War he was a
lockstep liberal, which at least has the virtue of being consistent.
But from there out, the plot's been harder to follow than a David
Lynch movie.

The Reblican party today is sort of where the Democrat party was 35 years
ago (John Kennedy would be considered a conservative in todays world).
However... the Democrat Party is, for all practical purposes, Socialist
today. It will continue to move to the left so that one day soon it will
pop out on the right as communist.

The Dems today are basically comprised of blue lesbian sociology
professors and yuppie-hating union pipefitters. Their real problem is
that when one half of their members meet the other half, they're
shocked by what they see. As a blue-state agnostic city-dwelling
professional I may be a long way culturally from the Good 'ol Boys in
TX and WV, but I could drink Bud from the can and talk guns, hunting
dogs, and bass boats with them all afternoon long.

Still, I agree that if Iraq was under its own control and Osama was
slowly decaying in a 6' deep hole, I'd be tempted to vote for Kerry
and the ultimate form of true conservative government: complete
gridlock.

-cwk.