] I will add one thing more. And that is the personal
] sadness I feel that this president who praises freedom
] wishes to take it away from a whole group of Americans
] who might otherwise support many parts of his agenda. To
] see the second family tableau with one family member
] missing because of her sexual orientation pains me to the
] core. And the president made it clear that discriminating
] against gay people, keeping them from full civic dignity
] and equality, is now a core value for him and his party.
] The opposite is a core value for me. Some things you can
] trade away. Some things you can compromise on. Some
] things you can give any politician a pass on. But there
] are other values - of basic human dignity and equality -
] that cannot be sacrificed without losing your integrity
] itself. That's why, despite my deep admiration for some
] of what this president has done to defeat terror, and my
] affection for him as a human being, I cannot support his
] candidacy. Not only would I be abandoning the small
] government conservatism I hold dear, and the hope of
] freedom at home as well as abroad, I would be betraying
] the people I love. And that I won't do.

[ I also thought it was very telling that while Cheney's daughter was present at the convention, with her partner, she was very obviously not invited on stage with the rest of the family. Disgusting.

Upthread of what i quoted here, Sullivan makes some good points on both sides of the debate... there are ways in which this was a good speech, and may have won some people. But he also points out the very blatant way in which the republicans have renounced their plank of small government and done so in the most irresponsible way possible. He talks about "big insolvent government" (Bush) versus "big solvent government" (Kerry) and points out that if you're a real fiscal conservative, Bush just isn't your guy (something i've thought was obvious for a long time now).

I've got friends who describe themselves as fiscally conservative but socially liberal. I've always thought that was kind of a bullshit cop out in the first place -- felt like saying, "I'm all for helping people, but I'm sure not paying for it." Regardless though, allow for a second that you can be both of those things in one. How do you vote for a candidate who's neither?

As Sullivan says above, you can't, not without losing your integrity. -k]