daswig

There's where I think you're wrong. Think about it. Patriot: Kerry voted it. Now he's against it, sort of, maybe, as long as it's important for him to have the far left on his side.

Kerry wants to subordinate the US Constitution to International law and the UN. Now International law and the UN doesn't recognize a bunch of civil liberties that you will well and truly miss. For example, there's nothing to keep them from passing legislation to regulate virtually anything that they want to. They don't have the same kind of checks and balances in place that our Constitution does, and once the precedent is set that International law supercedes the Constitution, there's literally NOTHING to protect our constitutional freedoms. It's like virginity: all it takes is one little prick to lose it, and you can never get it back. Now what kind of legislation could they pass that would effect us? First off, they're trying to get the ability to tax. Guess who will be the people taxed? hint: It's not the Third world. Secondly, they may very well want to regulate things like consumption of consumer goods, and their distribution, in addition to environmental regulation. Where's the rub in that? Well, suppose, just suppose, that the underdeveloped world decides that they want to live like Americans. Cars, high tech gizmos, the whole nine yards. Can you see any potential problems with this? The planet can't support 6 billion people living an American lifestyle. Something has to give. Care to bet who will do the giving? The US, with their one vote, or the 50+ third world nations and their 50+ votes?

Bush is no bargain. Personally, I think his incorporation of his religious beliefs are preposterous. But Kerry will be an UNMITIGATED disaster from a civil rights perspective, and I think Bush has pretty much "shot his bolt" in the civil liberties department. Please keep in mind, I'm coming from a perspective of being a J.D., an ACLU member, and an NRA member.

Now the REALLY fucked up stuff has widespread bipartisan support. Take, for example, bankruptcy reform. I know personally one of the people who was called in to help draft the reform, he was a professor of mine in Law School. If that passes, and eventually it will (in 2001, it got killed by 9/11, but IIRC, it passed the senate at better than 95-5.) that will COMPLETELY alter the equation, and will strip people of majorly needed protection, unless it's new provisions are overturned on 13th amendment grounds, which isn't that likely.

Kerry has been trying to paint himself as a great defender of liberty, including the Second Amendment. That's just not true. In 2000, in Boston, he spoke at an anti gun rally, in front of a person holding a sign that said "AL GORE: BAN ALL GUNS." Yup, real pro-gun. Kerry supports the Assault Weapons Ban. Recently, when his campaign was asked about favorite guns, his campaign said he owned a "chinese communist assault rifle". Turns out it's not an AK-47, it's a Mosin-Nagant M-1891 bolt-action derivative, with a 5 shot non-detachable magazine. If they consider a 100+ year old bolt action rifle to be an assault weapon, what gun DON'T they consider to be an Assault Weapon?

Don't believe the hype.