I recommend you to read Craig Biddle's open letter, Capitalist Hawk for Kerry, and John Lewis's article, Opposing Platonic Conservatism: A Matter of Values. [Via The Rule of Reason.]
Here is a quote by Craig Biddle:
Here, in essence, is what Bush has done. By packaging a permission-seeking, capitulating, restrained, dovish foreign policy with lip service to an independent, firm, do-what-needs-to-be-done, hawkish one—he has removed the concept of the latter from the foreign policy debate. Kerry, unwittingly, would put it back on the table; this is why I will vote for him. (Craig Biddle, October 2004.)
Here is an excerpt from John Lewis's article:
Some people think that philosophy is irrelevant in this election; after all, there is a real emergency to be solved. But philosophy matters; it is why we have a deadly emergency. The Platonic view demands tough talk--the expression of a principle--followed by compromise, the application of the principle. This has had horrendous consequences. (Capitalism Magazine, 10/05/04.)
10 days ago I watched the end of the PBS documentary, The Jesus Factor, ("Jesusfaktorn" in Swedish). With this program fresh in my mind, I would have a hard time to vote for Bush and give him the opportunity to push his faith-based agenda for additional four more years. So, what's your take on the situation? Should we be "Capitalist Hawks for Kerry," or "Anti-Bushites for Bush"? [Via US Election 2004.] Related: My post, THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT IS WRONG.