posted on March 15, 2004 11:16:43 AM new
Kerry makes himself look to be the azz he really is..........such quick and brilliant retorts.....how can we ever live without him?
------------------------------
Powell challenges Kerry to name `foreign leaders'
By JULIE MASON
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle
BETHLEHEM, Pa. -- Sen. John Kerry was put on the defensive Sunday after being challenged to name the foreign leaders he claims are eager for the defeat of President Bush.
The gauntlet was thrown on national television by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who said Kerry should name names or "find something else to talk about."
On the campaign trail, Kerry was confronted by a heckler at a town hall meeting.
A somewhat rattled Kerry refused to identify the "foreign leaders" he claims to have met who told him they were looking forward to a different president in the White House.
"I have talked to people around the world who look forward to the day they can have an administration they can work with," Kerry said.
Pressed by reporters to describe what level of official he was referring to -- whether a prime minister, president or some other rank -- Kerry said: "I'm not going to play that game."
The questions sprang from Kerry's remarks last week at a fund-raiser in Florida, where he said: "I've met foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but, boy, they look at you and say, `You've gotta win this, you gotta beat this guy, we need a new policy,' things like that. So there is enormous energy out there."
Kerry's remarks about foreign leaders drew a skeptical response Sunday from Powell, who told Fox News that he had no idea what foreign leaders Kerry was talking about.
"It's an easy charge, an easy assertion to make. But if he feels it is that important an assertion to make, he ought to list some names," Powell said. ``If he can't list names, then perhaps he should find something else to talk about."
Since first making the remarks, Kerry has declined to identify the leaders, but said the countries he visited most recently before launching his presidential bid include England and France.
Asked by reporters for more specifics, Kerry would identify them only as allies.
At a town hall meeting Sunday in Bethlehem, Pa., Kerry was confronted by Cedric Brown, a sign company owner and Bush supporter who demanded the foreign leaders' names during an exchange punctuated with shouting and booing from the mostly Democratic audience.
Brown, 52, who identified himself as a Vietnam War veteran, accused Kerry of meeting with foreign leaders as part of a plan to overthrow Bush.
Kerry told Brown that foreign leaders would love to see a change of leadership in this country, but were not plotting an overthrow.
"Let me just say something to you, sir. Just a minute. Just a minute," Kerry said, trying to talk above Brown's shouting. "I'm not going to betray a private conversation with anybody and get some leader -- they have to deal with this administration."
As the crowd shouted for Brown to sit down, he insisted that Kerry reveal how recently he had met with foreign leaders.
The Democrats ran on 'Honesty' and I told 'em at the time they would never get anywhere. It was too radical for politics. The Republicans ran on 'Common Sense' and the returns showed that there were 8 million more people in the United States who had 'Common Sense' enough not to believe that there was 'Honesty' in politics." --Will Rogers
posted on March 15, 2004 11:39:56 AM new
I do believe we're beginning to see another of kerry's patterns emerging here, bear. One of making statements but then not wanting to answer questions about it.
Just like his campaign people have done when they were told his national health insurance costs vs. his projected savings didn't add up. He too said [paraphrasing here] he wasn't going to address those questions. They'd figure them out AFTER kerry was elected.
Maybe there's more to come?? I hope they continue to 'call' him/them on each and every one.
posted on March 15, 2004 05:35:19 PM new
Well....guess there have been others too. There IS a developing pattern.
---------
Mr. Kerry has made other claims during the campaign and then refused to back them up, including statements that Mr. Bush delayed the deal with Libya to give up its weapons of mass destruction program for political reasons.
Republicans have begun calling Mr. Kerry the "international man of mystery," and said his statements go even beyond those of former Vice President Al Gore, who was besieged by stories that he lied or exaggerated throughout the 2000 presidential campaign.
"I think it's beyond that level. The results of this week, I think he's going to have a very serious credibility problem with the American people," said Rep. Deborah Pryce, Ohio Republican and chairman of the House Republican Conference.
In a February meeting with the editorial board from the New York Daily News, Mr. Kerry said Mr. Bush, for political reasons, delayed closing the deal to have Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi surrender his weapons of mass destruction program.
"There's evidence that we could have had that deal some time ago," Mr. Kerry told the newspaper, saying he had heard "from friends in the British government that the deal was in a slow lock." But the paper said Mr. Kerry refused to give specifics.
Then earlier this month, Mr. Kerry called for an investigation into whether the U.S. overthrew Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, telling NBC's "Today" show a "very close friend in Massachusetts" had talked with people who had made accusations that Mr. Aristide had been kidnapped.
"I don't know the truth of it. I really don't. But I think it needs to be explored, and we need to know the truth of what happened," Mr. Kerry said.
Republicans said Mr. Kerry's remarks remind them of former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark, who said and later recanted that he knew of a secret Pentagon memo listing the next countries after Iraq to be attacked in the war on terror.
In a speech to the Dupage County Lincoln Day dinner in Oak Brook, Ill., last night, Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie said Mr. Kerry has "a more vivid imagination than General Clark."
"Kerry's imaginary friends have British and French accents," Mr. Gillespie said.
Sen. George Allen, Virginia Republican and third-highest ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said such a political conversation occurring between a U.S. senator and the leader of a foreign country is hard to imagine. "It would just be so inappropriate," he said. "I think it would be insulting."
Several foreign leaders denied having any such conversations with Mr. Kerry, including Mr. Schroeder, whose spokesman issued a denial.
And Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer told Australian radio this week that the [b]remarks certainly didn't come from Australian leaders[/i]. He said it's not right either for leaders to make those comments or for a candidate to make them public.
"I think it's probably better to keep foreign leaders and the views of foreign leaders out of domestic elections, I mean, certainly we do that here in this country. I mean, people express different views to you, if you're a candidate, I tend not to pass on those kinds of views publicly," he said.
"Rather than dealing with President George W. Bush and hawkish officials in his administration, Pyongyang seems to hope victory for the Democratic candidate on November 2 would lead to a softening in U.S. policy towards the country's nuclear-weapons program" according to London's Financial Times, which said that Mr. Kerry's speeches are being broadcast on Radio Pyongyang and reported in "glowing" terms.
"The mullahs in Iran probably don't care to have Bush in there because he won't suffer terrorists or the country's that harbor them," said Mr. Allen. "I want a president who cares about what's right rather than the U.N. protocols."
And a poll taken by Andres McKenna Polling and Research found that Americans overwhelmingly believe "the terrorists would prefer" Mr. Kerry to win the election.
The poll of 800 registered voters, taken in February, showed 60 percent thought terrorists would be happier with Mr. Kerry, while just 25 percent said the terrorists would prefer Mr. Bush.
--------------
posted on March 15, 2004 08:49:38 PM new
OK, lets be realistic. Do you honestly believe that all the major world leader want Bush to remain in office? If you were someone who was hoping that Bush would be voted out, would you want that opinion to be public? Of course not. Any bonehead knows that. If Bush stays in office you get 4 more years of interactiion with a leader you have publicly denounced. It's not in the best interest of the nations this men lead. You all know that and you know damn well that that is why Kerry will not name names and so does Powell. It was stupid of him to make the statement in the first place but the absolute worst possible follow-up would be for him to actually name the nations.
It really sucks when logic ruins your fun.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by Fenix03 on Mar 15, 2004 08:49 PM ]
posted on March 15, 2004 09:39:01 PM new
No I don't expect him to name names. But I wouldn't have expected someone running for President to keep dropping these 'claims' either and not be able to back them up.
The dems have taken this to a whole new level this election year. Passing along 'rumors' they say are rumors, but when questioned have no support for their statements except "Well, it's probably just a rumor, but that's what I heard." That's behavior for juveniles, not presidential candidates.
Look how many foreign leaders felt they had to come forward and say, "It wasn't me who said that."
I agree with Powell. They don't want to say who said what, then don't mention it at all.
posted on March 15, 2004 09:52:15 PM newIt really sucks when logic ruins your fun
And as illogical as you are, guess you really don't have much fun.
The Democrats ran on 'Honesty' and I told 'em at the time they would never get anywhere. It was too radical for politics. The Republicans ran on 'Common Sense' and the returns showed that there were 8 million more people in the United States who had 'Common Sense' enough not to believe that there was 'Honesty' in politics." --Will Rogers
posted on March 15, 2004 11:24:23 PM new
[i]No I don't expect him to name names. But I wouldn't have expected someone running for President to keep dropping these 'claims' either and not be able to back them up.
[/i]
kinda like Bush and his WMDs, huh. With the exception that with this folks aren't gonna die over it...
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on March 16, 2004 12:12:23 AM new
No, bunni - Not even close to being the same.
The UN, for over 12 years, had spent time on resolution - after resolution - after resolution on the womd issue. They were all about the womd.
The past three administrations ALSO thought saddam had womd. World leaders, UN inspectors, etc also thought he had womd. He did have womd and used it....and never proved he had destroyed the un-accounted amounts the UN inspectors still believe he had.
It's being used only as a political issue by those who opposed going to war with Iraq. And no one knows for sure if the womd might still be found. Or we may find out where it went. Or we may get confirmation that all our [and other countries] intel info for all these years was wrong. Because it hasn't been found....doesn't mean it won't be. Look at all those planes found hidden under the sand dunes.
Saddam is the one to blame. He could have ended this many years ago. He didn't. Our intel info felt he presented a threat to those around him and to the US. Just like clinton thought. That threat has now been removed thanks to this President.
posted on March 16, 2004 11:41:11 PM new
Jay Leno:
"John Kerry is claiming that leaders of other countries have told him they hope he defeats President Bush in November. President Bush is now challenging John Kerry to name those foreign leaders. That's a first, Bush challenging anyone to name a foreign leader."
David Letterman:
"John Kerry says that foreign leaders want him to be president, but that he can't name the foreign leaders. That's all right, President Bush can't name them either."
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on March 17, 2004 05:30:10 AM new
bunni - No womd found YET. Just as the planes were buried....the womd may be also. Or they could have been moved to some other country....like Syria or Iran.
And saddam was paying $25,000 to the families of the suicide bombers. That's supporting terrorism to me.
And I believe Colin Powell when he has stated there were reasons to believe people visiting Iraq had connections to terrorism. Granted....the administration hasn't been able to connect the dots. But a lot of signs were there.
Also...on saddam's aircraft. Were these aircraft in their military installations? No they were buried under the sand. See the big earth movers in your picture. Your pictures show the sight AFTER they were uncovered. The picture I saw was sand dunes, BEFORE the were uncovered.
Why is it the left appears to constantly be protecting Saddam and his actions? Even before the war they were predicting all the horrors that were going to come down on our soldiers IF we sent them there. They were then trusting the clinton administrations, the UN and other countries belief that he had them. Even after clinton stated he presented a threat to the world and our country.
I'd challenge anyone to find an article where clinton or anyone else in the US governement thinks saddam being removed from power was a bad thing - dem, rep, ind, lib. But the left continues to point out all the reasons they think we shouldn't have removed him.
This president has done the world a tremendous favor by removing saddam from power.
posted on March 17, 2004 07:27:21 AM new
Still has nothing to do with 9-11. There aremany regimes in the world that are bad & where it wouldn't be a bad thing to have the leaders overtthrown. They don't have anything todo with 9-11 either, and we'd be at war ad infinitum if we went after every one of them.
Iraq is Bush's smoke screen--it took our minds off Osama bin Laden--the one we really want and whome Bush failed to find.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on March 17, 2004 07:53:47 AM new
Kerry shot back: "That's none of your business".
Those words will cost Kerry, what ever chance he had to unseat President Bush in the upcoming election.
Kerry as did Dean showed disrespect for a voter. This in itself, along with conservations with world leaders drumming up backing, for the over throw of a setting President is Not only UN American, but Treason. Kerry is a Senator. Not the setting President or Vice President. He is running for President. With these Actions he is not Worthy of even being a Senator let alone being President.
There were no applause during his meeting with VFW Members in West Virginia.
posted on March 17, 2004 08:02:25 AM new"There were no applause during his meeting with VFW Members in West Virginia."
Fred.
That statement is not correct, Fred.
Campaigning in West Virginia, home to 203,000 veterans, he brought along seven of the men he served with in Vietnam, introducing them as his "band of brothers."
The audience, made up largely of veterans, gave them a standing ovation.
posted on March 17, 2004 08:45:26 AM new
bunni - To put it simply neither does North Korea *TO SOME*. Then there are others who think they've sold NW secrets to other countries.
NK too presents a threat to the US and the world. And I guarantee you should the Bush administration believe that NK is willing to act on those threats, Bush take care of Jong Ill too.
They don't all have to be tied together to present a threat to our country is the point.
posted on March 17, 2004 08:54:02 AM newhe brought along seven of the men he served with in Vietnam, introducing them as his "band of brothers."
yes...he drags these SEVEN vets with him. And he continues to speak about his time in Vietnam. So what? There are many thousands of vets who don't support him because of his anti-American stand when he returned home. Don't admire that he blamed the US soldiers for the same actions in Vietnam, action he admitted he committed himself.
But as the other quote I posted said.... it is ironic that the anti-war left, the anti-military left supports a candidate who supported the same Iraq war that they so opposed.
posted on March 17, 2004 09:27:36 AM new
So talking with foreign leaders and showing disrespect to one heckler is treason? Might as well say that running to replace the seated president is treason. I'm afraid that may just become true. It's obvious many feel that way.
