About a week ago on Hannity & Colmes, Sean Hannity spewed a litany of lies
about John Kerry being a flip-flopper and tax raiser, lies that came directly from the Bush campaign. Hannity said:

Here's a guy that supported gay marriage, now against it.

This is a lie. Kerry's position has always been consistent on this. I
disagree with him, but Kerry has always been against gay marriage. He is for civil unions. What Hannity is doing here is taking Kerry's vote against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and deliberately misrepresenting it as a declaration in favor of gay marriage. But let me read you what Kerry said on the floor of the Senate about that vote.

''I will vote against this bill, though I am not for same-sex marriage,
because I believe that this debate is fundamentally ugly, and it is fundamentally political, and it is fundamentally flawed*.the results of this bill will not be to preserve anything, but will serve to attack a group of people out of various motives and rationales, and certainly out of a lack of understanding and a lack of tolerance, and will only serve the purposes of the political season.''

And on that, I totally agree with him. So, for the record: Kerry has been
totally consistent on this. He has never flip-flopped. Sean Hannity is lying, and he knows it.

Next.

Here's a guy that by my count has had six separate different unique ositions
on the war on Iraq.

Okay. This is just stupid. Kerry's position on Iraq has been totally
consistent. Yes, he voted to authorize the president to use force against Iraq. But voted for that in order for Bush to go to the UN and get the inspectors back into Iraq, which was a genuine triumph. But, the president acted in bad faith. Here is what Kerry said about it on Face the Nation on September 14, 2003:

''The president promised he would go to war as a matter of last resort. He
didn't. The president promised he would build a coalition and work through the United Nations. He didn't. We're paying the price for the reckless way in which this president approached this. It's a failure of diplomacy, and today it's a failure of leadership.''

Kerry was entirely consistent, and not only that, he was right.

Next.

Here's a guy that voted for the $87 billion to fund the war before he voted against it.

This is correct, but it's not a flip-flop. Kerry voted for an amendment to
the Iraqi appropriations bill that would have paid for the $87 billion by taking it out of the tax cut for the extremely rich. That amendment lost, 57-42, because Bush insisted that the $87 billion be added to the deficit. As we discussed with Paul Krugman last week, never in the history of this country have we had tax cuts while we were at war. Not only that, but Paul Krugman told me that he has yet to find any civilization in the history of this planet that ever had a tax cut during a war.

After the amendment went down, Kerry did vote against the final $87 billion
supplemental appropriation, as a protest against the way Bush got us into the war and is conducting it. But he knew that the troops would have the support, because the bill passed 87 to 12.

You can support our troops, and still protest the president. If you can't
hold those two ideas in your head I suggest you switch over to Rush right now.

(continued in following post)

Just plain lies

Next.

Here's a guy that was for the Patriot Act. Now against it.

Well, here's what Kerry said:

''I voted for the Patriot Act right after September 11th convinced that,
with a sunset clause, it was the right decision to make. It clearly wasn't a
perfect bill and it had a number of flaws but this wasn't the time to
haggle. It was the time to act.

''But George Bush and John Ashcroft abused the spirit of national action after the terrorist attacks. They have used the Patriot Act in ways that were never intended and for reasons that have nothing to do with terrorism. That's why, as President, I will propose new anti-terrorism laws that advance the War on Terror while ending the assault on our basic rights.''

In other words, he voted for the Patriot Act after 9/11, although he objected to parts of it. Bush has abused it in ways that were never intended by Congress when it was passed. If you can't hold that in your head, you will love Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

No Child Left Behind, for it, now against it.

This is an easy one. On this one, like all the others, Kerry's position is
consistent, and principled, and Hannity's is dishonest. Kerry voted for the bill, which the president promised to fund. The president didn't fund it, which created unfunded mandates on states and school districts across this country. As
a result, classroom sizes are getting bigger, after-school programs are being dropped, teachers are being fired, and education is getting worse. Everyone in education across this country will tell you that. No Child Left Behind is the most ironically named piece of legislation since the 1942 Japanese Family Leave Act.

Next.

Here's a guy that supported -- was against the death penalty for terrorists who kill Americans. Now he's for it.

Actually, Hannity's right on this one. Kerry was against the death penalty
before 9/11. And after 9/11, he now supports the death penalty for terrorists. Now, Bush?¯before 9/11, wanted to invade Iraq. And after it, wanted to invade Iraq. So maybe he was more consistent. Kerry was affected viscerally by 9/11. I'm not sure I'd call that a flip-flop.

Next.

The only thing he seems consistent on is that, throughout the 19 years he was in the Senate, he voted to raise taxes consistently 350 times.

This is a disgraceful lie. It is a distortion of a phony statistic put out by the Bush campaign. The Bush campaign lists 350 of Kerry's votes for, quote, ''higher taxes.'' Almost all of these are votes Kerry cast to leave taxes unchanged, such as a 1987 vote against a repeal of the ''windfall profit'' tax on oil. Taxes would have remained the same if his side had prevailed. In other words, this was a vote against an irresponsible tax cut for the rich.

Let me make a side note. We need to pay for the government. Someone's got to pay for it. And if you cut taxes for the rich, the burden gets shifted to everyone else, or their children.

Bush's list even includes votes that Kerry cast in favor of alternative
Democratic tax cuts. On Bush's list, there's only one actual tax increase that Kerry voted for, which incidentally is counted twice. It's his vote for Clinton's 1993 Deficit Reduction Act, which raised taxes on the top 1% and cut taxes on people at the bottom, and was followed by eight years of unprecedented growth.

What does that tell us about a man that has no core values or principles?

The man who has no core values or principles here is a man named Sean
Hannity. And you know who came up with all these lies? The campaign of a man named George W. Bush.

You're going to hear this garbage repeated over, and over, and over again from now until November.

Kerry is not a flip-flopper. But Bush is a liar. And his shills in the media, like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh?¯they're liars too.

And this has what to do with CC?

Not trying to flame you here, I just thought this was a Circle C related message board.

microcosm to macrocosm


Chris

Thanks for your question. This IS a Circle C related message board. It is also much more: it is a forum for discussion of events and ideas. We in Circle C are fortunate to have the ability to communicate easily and freely with each other and to express our views on issues. Democracy is something about which I am passionate and I believe that it has to be practiced at all levels.

We have just undergone a democratic revolution in our HOA. It began with simple inquiry into statements and actions of those who purported to be our ''leaders.'' The much-needed changes that our neighborhood elected to establish came about as a result of the free exchange of ideas among neighbors. Our Circle C neighborhood is a microcosm for a much larger neighborhood: the United States and, ultimately, the entire world. The words and deeds of those who would aspire to leadership are worthy of our attention and comment, especially when fundamental principles of democracy are involved or being subverted.

This wonderful resource, though often maligned by some who are repulsed by the abuse which sometimes occurs here, is open to everyone everywhere in the world. Yes, it is our neighborhood voice. It is also one which can and should be heard far from the boundaries of our neighborhood and will hopefully have an impact on those who would follow our example.

(Muffled noise of soapbox being removed)

Thanks again for asking.