'moral values' is both a concept and code phrase similar to 'law and order'.  there's nothing particularly moral or valuable about making civil laws that exclude an entire class of citizenry.  similarly, despite its shameful use in the 60s and 70s, there was nothing lawful nor orderly about invoking racial hatred. 

exactly.   unless youre using 'moral values' to mean only a specific set of moral values defined by a candidate or campaign to mean support for a specific agenda as it was in this past election. 

where 'law and order' came in was merely as example.  when politicians in the 60s used it--and the way it was interpreted by and large by voters--law and order didnt mean advocacy of a well run lawful socieity; it meant keep the rioters outta my suburb.

Hey, moral values were the most important thing to me in this election, and I voted for Kerry.  For me it was an issue of, war on false pretenses, or war with honor, and I thought Kerry could give honor.

Anyway, that's just my view.

Cheers

Gold Star for Sarah.

By making ridiculous charges like treason, dr, you have wandered far afield of the point.

Cheers

Did you serve in a war drmiller?  Were you alive during Vietnam even?  John Kerry is not the only veteran to have spoken against the war, and there are documented cases where US troops did do things that he spoke about.  For that matter, the idea of Vietnam has undergone a strange transformation in the past 30+ years.  People now speak about how we could have "won" Vietnam if we hadn't had those darned hippies, or if we'd escalated the conflict, or whatever.  But these people have forgotten, or never known, that there were all kinds of outside factors that caused the United States to lose the Vietnam war.  Fortunately for those people I'm a history professor who likes to show off, so here's a few of the reasons: The Soviets were rattling sabers in other portions of the world; the guerilla warfare, though not terribly strategically effective, was incredibly effective as far as morale goes; more people were upset by the people we installed in power in South Vietnam than really believed in communism; United States forces had never been trained to operate effectively in the environment in which they operated; China was becoming a military power that didn't appreciate the United States mucking about in their portion of the world; the US completely failed in their effort to win over the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese people when they leveled large portions of the jungle without regard as to whether there were combatants or not, that's just a few, but there are many interesting books on the subject.  Oh, and even assuming that John Kerry did not do the thing which got him his medals, he would hardly be the only Vietnam vet, or veteran of any war, who had fabricated a story to get a purple heart, or even higher awards.  If Kerry executed a brilliant and bizarre conspiracy to cover up what had really happened during Vietnam, and the story was only coming out now, decades later, than wouldn't Kerry have been clever enough to completely dominate the election?  Through fraud, misdirection, or whatever?  Repeating baseless, and I do declare them baseless, as, by the way, did the US Defense Department, accusations, does not make them true.

Cheers