Kerrification

John Kerry just lost himself a few thousand votes, at least. It was a calculated risk, to be sure, since most of those votes will be in "safe" Kerry states, but it can't help motivate his base to know that he too would have gone to war in Iraq despite the lack of WMD's. In a feel-good era of politics, I would understand. But in this vitriolic election, how can Kerry justify sidling up next to Bush on the most divisive and rancourous issue in the election. At least, at very least Kerry could have maintained his dignity by saying that he believed WMD's were a good reason, and without those it was unjustified. But no, now we can make no mistake that a vote for Kerry is a vote for pretty much the same foreign policy as we've grown accustomed to (or punchdrunk from?).

My politically and philosophically astute co-worker Neal and I agreed that our principal reason for voting for two equally and oppositely uninspiring candidates was the chance that the '05-'09 president may get to appoint a new Supreme Court Justice or two. With Kerry's stances on foreign policy, taxation, trade, education, and health care so similar to Bush's, it doesn't seem there's much else to vote on.