When President Bush says he supports a constitutional amendment to protect marriage, the media has a conniption fit about him dividing America. But when John Kerry does the same thing, he’s given a free pass as being principled and coming to his positions according to his personal ethics.
Of course, it’s ironic that Kerry says he supports a state constitutional amendment, but opposes a federal one. “Kerry has said he opposed amending the US Constitution, because he believes the issue of marriage should be left to the states.” Really? Just like abortion should be left to the states? What a fraud. When the federal courts and legislation are more amenable to his agenda, then it’s a matter of federalism, but when the states are advancing his radical agenda, then state’s rights are most important.
Like in everything else, John Kerry’s principles cannot be described as “rock solid,” but more accurately as a weathervane: pointing in whatever direction the political winds are blowing.
Well if Kerry does win (God Forbid) then he follows through on this train of thought (fat chance) we would have at least one state that is anti-abortion and that has made it a law. I pray that it will not be overturned and that SD will stick to their guns on this one keeping it illegal.
The media bias here is that Democrats always do things on principle and Republicans always do things for political advantage like “playing to the base”.
All the stories of cynicism in society focus on Republicans. All the stories of compassion and the good stuff government does focus on Democrats.