NationStates Jolt Archive

My liberal friend just made this comment. Can you please explain to me how this is false.

WHAT ARE THEY FIGHTING FOR?



The fact is George W. Bush should have been fired. The American people should not have stood for the war in Iraq. He clearly mislead us, and is clearly letting our troops die from enemies they cannot see. If the troops are fighting for our freedom, then so be it! But they are not. And because Kerry used a wide vocabulary and was not aggressive enough towards Bushes psychological conditioning, he lost. And in a way he deserved to lose. Bush told crowds that Kerry was going to hit the terrorists after they hit us first. I firmly believe that NO ONE should have fallen for this twist. Clearly they did. Every one heard that Kerry was a flip-flopper… Why? Because he voted on the war before he voted against it? WRONG in a long explanation he admitted that he did, (while most people would be like “There’s no excuse for that!” (then the ADD starts to kick in big time due to lack of violence, hot lesbian sex or suspense) he voted for the president to use it because he thought the president would use it responsibly. He thought that the president would use this as a last resort. But oh was he wrong.



The fact is, Kerry was more experienced, smarter, knew what he was doing, and most importantly he was RESPONSIBLE. Preemptive war with out allies is not RESPONSIBLE.

Your liberal friend is providing the answer to his own question in large part, and using flawed premises for the rest.

Ignoring the flawed premises; before you fire an employee, you first make sure you have someone you want to replace him with.

As you can see from the overall election, Americans are rejecting liberalism - and have been for quite a while. Kerry has proven to be very liberal. Edwards (how quickly we forget about him) also.

If the Dems leadership had wanted a chance they should have moved further center than left. They went with the loudest voice (Deaniacs and kin) rather than the voice of reason.

There is going to be a shakedown, I would not want to be Terry McAuliffe right now. The Democrats will need to redefine their party, and possibly redefine liberalism in America if they want to start winning more then they are losing.

Maybe instead of moving more to the left, they just need to move where left leads.

Them crazy commie liberal pinkos, everything they say must be false, am i rite?

Bozzy, you fumbled. Somehow I doubt that was meant as a structured logcial argument. "Too liberal"? "Redefine liberalism"? Is that supposed to be serious?

"should have moved further center than left. They went with the loudest voice (Deaniacs and kin) rather than the voice of reason."

PROTIP: Some people have different values than you and support things for different reasons.

The point being made there is that your government really didn't have to send troops there. Your friend is obviously of the opinion that it was a bad idea. You can't say that it's without merit with that figure of 25,000 insurgents out and about Iraq and those high expolsives missing.

In the future, just because you disagree with someone's opinion, do go around trying to get people to "show how it is false."