Freedom of religion should include freedom from religion

It’s old news, but in the time of the Religious Right and its minions in the House of Representatives pushing to keep “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, this Tampa Tribune story underscores that the First Amendment should include freedom from religion among its protections.
Also, for those of you who feel pushed by the Religious Right, read down the story to note that the Supreme Court has already declared explicitly Christian prayers verboten at governmental meetings.

Points for Kerryistas to ponder about Iraq

1. First, Kerry's stance has shifted. Not as much as Rethugs claim, but it has shifted beyond "nuance." And his original votes were for 2004, not 2002, political reasons. See my antiwar POV on this earlier this week, as well as the post immediately below this.
2. No Western European government is going to help us extricate ourselves from Iraq no matter who is in the White House Jan. 21, 2005. Jacques Chirac is not as dumb as you want him to be. Pull your collective heads out.
3. International affairs, contrary to Powell, is NOT Pottery Barn. We don't "own" Iraq, so let's get the hell out ASAP.
4. How quickly that is done, and the connected figure of how many more lives are lost or saved, is a very legitimate Bush/Kerry measuring stick.
And, to the degree Kerry doesn't talk about getting us out ASAP, all other things being equal, probably the diff between him and Bush isn't that great.
Period. End of story.

Kerry has changed on Iraq

But it would be OK if he would admit it ...

admit he blew it, and come out as an antiwar candidate.
I'll even be gracious enough to let him say "he blew it" rather than the truth.
But he won't. He'll continue to fight about where Bush has gotten us now in Iraq, without doing either one of the two things that would truly appeal to antiwar voters — and journalists — like me.
The first would be to start talking about a quick, not four-year, exit strategy.
The second would be to tacitly admit he blew it in his 2002 estimation of Bush. He can do it tacitly and spin it all he wants. Until that point, a skeptical observer must wonder how much better Kerry's judgment is than Bush's.

So, is Kerry now saying we never should have invaded Iraq?

In a speech at New York University, Kerry said:

I would have tightened the noose and continued to pressure and isolate Saddam Hussein – who was weak and getting weaker -- so that he would pose no threat to the region or America.

Since he didn't say anything further about what he would have done in 2003, I am taking that to mean he is now saying we shouldn't have invaded.

Well, if BushCo reads between the lines the same way, unless Kerry comes out and actually says that with conviction, he's really going to get called a flip-flopper.

Klein skewers Kerry as debater

If you expect John Kerry to mop the floor with George Bush in the presidential debates, think again.

So says Joe Klein in a Sept. 18 Time column, saying “Kerry is all oratorical flab” and predicting Kerry could lose the election if he can't nail Bush in the debates.

Maybe Kerry has some fight after all

Last week I wondered when Kerry might start making the debate over the number of presidential debates an issue, and only offering 50-50 odds he actually would hang tough.
Well, it appears all three debates called for the by Commission on Presidential Debates, including the Oct. 8 town-hall format in St. Louis, will be held.
While the Bush camp said it was concerned about the process used to screen alleged undecided voters, I believe it's more a case of being worried about how they will break.