Like Tyler, this thing has bothered me from the first time I saw it. I'm not a big raw meat, "politics is war" kind of guy, but there is no way in %^&& I'm giving John Kerry a free pass if ,God forbid, he wins the election. I'll give him as much grief as I gave Bush I, Bush II and Bill Clinton. That is the fundamental difference between the right and the left. Those on the right aren't afraid to call guys like this an <idiot. I repeatedly called for Janklow's head after he was found guilty of manslaughter.
After "digital brownshirts" and "wing nuts" I'm supposed to play nice?
I think there is a difference between legitimate criticism and what we've seen from the left the last four years. I didn't have a problem with Bill Clinton's extra-curricular activities in the White House (that's between him, Monica, his wife and the Lord as far as I am concerned) but I did (and do) have a problem with his lying under oath about it. (And there is a huge difference between getting intelligence that leads you to believe something that hasn't been proven true after the fact and not telling the truth under oath.)
My biggest concern with the pledge is that I don't feel it is neccessary. The fringes would never consider taking such a pledge in the first place and the ones that are aren't the ones that need to...
I do pledge to continue to treat whomever wins the election with exactly the same critical eye that I have treated everybody the last year on WMD: as fairly as possible. No more, no less. Will liberals do the same? I don't hear anybody whipping them in to line...
