What a typical Kerry supporter might believe

By David Limbaugh

The following is a non-exhaustive list of what a John Kerry supporter might believe.

Human life begins at conception, but so what?

John Kerry supports mainstream American values. John Kerry is liberal. John Kerry is not liberal – he’s conservative because he advocates reducing the budget deficit – presumably through his nearly $1 trillion health care plan.

Marriage is between a man and a woman, but I’ll be darned if public officials should do anything in their lawful exercise of power to preserve the institution of heterosexual marriage.

The definition of unilateral military action by the United States is the U.S. leading a coalition: 1) including Britain and almost 50 other nations; or 2) of every nation in the world, excluding the nation being attacked, Germany and France; or 3) any number of nations, but failing to secure the blessing of the United Nations.

Preemptive military action – a first strike against a nation that is believed to constitute a threat to the U.S. – is presumptuous, arrogant, reckless and irresponsible, even if the resulting military action also liberates the people of the target nation from tyranny and brutality. But unprovoked military action against a sovereign nation, such as Serbia, that couldn’t possibly constitute a threat to the United States or its strategic interests is honorable and desirable.

The following were sufficient cause for Congress to authorize President Bush to lead a U.S. military action against Iraq when it was politically expedient to support such action, but the very same factors were insufficient cause to authorize such action when it became politically expedient later to oppose such action: 17 violated United Nations resolutions by Iraq; repeated breaches of its post-Gulf-War treaties; the delivery of a deceitful 12,000-page report concerning its required disposal of WMD it admittedly possessed and had previously used against its own people; its repeated defiance of weapons inspectors, the unanimous belief among the world’s best intelligence agencies, French, British, Russian and American, that Saddam had or was rapidly developing stockpiles of WMD, that Iraq was supportive of terrorism and friendly with al-Qaida, though the two hadn’t signed and published a formal friendship pact.

Our invasion of Iraq was precipitated by neoconservative imperialists to project American power for its own sake and simultaneously by Dick Cheney to line his Halliburtonized pockets.

George Bush has exaggerated the terrorist threat. George Bush hasn’t taken the terrorist threat seriously enough.

Dubious decorated military service in Vietnam coupled with admissions of personal misconduct and commission of war atrocities against civilians better qualifies one for commander in chief than three years of on-the-job training in the position.

Enron is a political (rather than merely financial) scandal tainting the Bush administration because Republicans love big, evil corporations.

The most effective purveyors of conservatism, by virtue of espousing conservative doctrine, are intrinsically guilty of hate speech, but the anti-Bush rantings of the Maureen Dowds and Michael Moores are born of loving kindness.

The prisoner abuses of Abu Ghraib are more outrageous than terrorist beheadings of coalition soldiers and civilians.

Republicans, in concert with the U.S. Supreme Court, stole the 2000 presidential election even though independent studies concluded the president would have won anyway had the vote count proceeded. And, holding on to this irrational belief justifies an unquenchable grudge against President Bush because there’s nothing wrong with hate when it’s directed against hateful Republicans – just like there’s nothing wrong with intolerance when directed against intolerant conservatives and Christians.

The anti-American United Nations should supervise American elections.

The determining factor in racism is not how one feels and behaves in his personal life, but whether he passes certain litmus tests on public policy, such as supporting affirmative action and opposing school choice, though those policies may harm minorities and diminish their dignity more than helping them.

The definition of compassion is a willingness to support government confiscation and redistribution of other people’s money rather than personal generosity and graciousness.

One’s character is determined more by the public policies he conspicuously advocates, which often involve no personal sacrifice or inconvenience, than how he conducts himself when no one is looking.

Congressional Democrats should not be held accountable for emasculating the CIA during the ’80s and beyond when lambasting President Bush for presiding over today’s intelligence failures, which he – like they – reasonably relied on.

The Patriot Act was necessary when it was expedient to support it, but is terrible at the enforcement hands of the focus of modern evil, John Ashcroft.

We should have more U.S. Supreme Court justices who believe we ought to rely more heavily on international law.