One common statement I’ve grown to expect to hear from right-wingers who have grown frustrated with the blood being spilled day after day after day due to their voting to re-elect Bush is, “But at least we don’t have Kerry.”
It’s an interesting argument to suggest the country is somehow better off today than with John Kerry as president. But here’s one thing I know for sure that I think most of my conservative friends would agree with: Kerry would not appoint religious nutcases to scienced-based positions:
How to get a job in Washington, that balmy, bipartisan town: Direct an organization that opposes contraception on the grounds that it is “demeaning to women.” Compare premarital sex to heroin addiction. Advertise a link between breast cancer and abortion â€” a link that was refuted in 1997. Rant against sex ed. And hatch a loony theory about hormones.
You’re a shoo-in, and if your name is Eric Keroack you’re in your second month as deputy assistant secretary for population affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services. Dr. Keroack, a 46-year-old Massachusetts ob-gyn, today oversees the $280 million Title X program, the only federal program “designed to provide access to contraceptive supplies and information to all who want and need them, with priority given to low-income persons.”
Science matters, and crap like this hurts people. I believe Kerry would have been mature enough to appoint experts in their field rather than religious politicians to hold positions like this.
Another area of agreement between me and my right-wing friends is over balance of power. We agree that the government works best when no single party controls all branches of government. Whenever that happens, accountability goes out the window and the country moves in dangerous directions. With that in mind, Kerry would have been an obvious choice with the GOP controlling congress in 2004. It’s not a far stretch to imagine Republicans holding onto congress in 2006 had Kerry been president.