posted on September 14, 2004 07:54:49 AM new
With the war being probably the #1 issue, if not then one of the two top issues in this election, many haven't been able to understand exactly what kerry's position is and what he'll do if elected.
Having trouble figuring our exactly what kerry's position on war really is? It's simple really - and this OP-ed does a great job of reminding us where kerry has stood, at any given time.
Hey, he hasn't earned the reputation of being a 'flip-flopper' for no reason.
------------
John Kerry, explained
Rich Lowry
September 13, 2004
John Kerry's defenders complain that the Massachusetts senator has always had a consistent, even if "nuanced," position on the Iraq War. All it takes, they say, is a little attention, and what he believes becomes clear. They are right.
Kerry's position can be easily distilled in a few hundred words, as follows:
If Saddam Hussein invades a neighboring country, as he did in 1990, and a massive international coalition is mustered against him, as it was, the president of the United States should not be authorized to take military action.
But if the president launches military action and it is successful, he's all for it.
If in 2002 Saddam continues to defy the United Nations, but in much murkier circumstances than 1991 -- there's no invasion of a neighbor, for instance -- the president should be authorized to take military action. If the president takes such action and topples Saddam, he's for it. But if Howard Dean gains in the Democratic primaries in early 2004, he's against it.
In that event, if the war that he authorized needs funding, he's against it. If American troops need more body armor, he criticizes President Bush for not providing it.
But if funding for such armor is in the $87 billion bill to fund the war, which he authorized and once supported but no longer supports even though he authorized it, he's against it.
If -- prior to readjusting fully to the Dean surge -- he is asked about the $87 billion, he believes voting against it would be "irresponsible."
Later -- after vanquishing Dean, and as he tries to move to the center -- if he is criticized for actually voting against the $87 billion, he explains that he voted for it, before voting against it. He voted for it because it would be wrong to abandon our troops, but he voted against it because it would be wrong to support the war the troops are fighting in, which he once supported, but now opposes, even though he supports the troops as long as they can fight it without new funding.
If Kerry is welcoming another Democrat who voted against the $87 billion onto his ticket, John Edwards, he is "proud" of the vote he called "irresponsible," even if he didn't cast that vote as commonly understood, since he voted for it, before he voted against it, and even if he did vote against it, it was the right thing to do because he was against the war after he was for it, which is plenty reason to be proud.
If Kerry needs criticisms to hurl at Bush, it is unacceptable that Bush didn't muster the international coalition of the first Gulf War, which he opposed (before he was for it). If there are no WMDs in Iraq, Bush misled us into war, even though Kerry himself said the same thing about WMDs, misleading the public into supporting a war that he would support only for as long as he didn't oppose it.
If pressed to say whether he would have voted to authorize the war despite not finding WMDs, he supports voting the same way, authorizing a war that he eventually opposed, even though it deserved his authorization vote and still does today, despite his opposition to it.
If criticizing Bush's postwar management, he supports more troops in Iraq. If criticizing Bush's postwar management, he supports pulling troops out of Iraq in six months.
If desperate to gain post-August traction against Bush, he thinks Iraq is "the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time."
Although he would vote again to authorize the wrong war, so long as he wouldn't be committed to voting to fund it, at least not committed to voting to fund it in a circumstance where he couldn't immediately also vote against funding it to demonstrate how he opposed the wrong war he supported and would authorize again.
See? It's simple.
---
[Rich Lowry is editor of National Review, a Townhall.com member group, and author of Legacy: Paying the Price for the Clinton Years.]
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"One thing is for sure: the extremists have faith in our weakness. And the weaker we are, the more they will come after us." --Tony Blair
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"The War on Terror will not be won until America is united. And as long as Democrats target the Bush administration -- not the terrorists -- as the enemy, we are in trouble." --Oliver North
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Those are only two reasons why we need to:
posted on September 14, 2004 08:05:32 AM new
Linda, want to hear something funny? My DH says Bush Jr, KNEW there was WOMD's in Iraq because Bush SR was part of the administration that sold them to Hussein through Saudi and other avenues way back when.......
I have NO IDEA if that is an even remotely true statement. (But it sure sounds like a plausible arguement,doesnt it? But which side it works for is a whole nutter thought!)
ha-ha-ha-ha!!
..
..
~~ Keep thy heart with all diligence for out of it are the issues(forces)of life..Proverbs 4:23~~
posted on September 14, 2004 08:11:18 AM new
posted on September 12, 2004 06:39:04 AM edit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
. Social Security Surplus
BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS... "We're going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus." [President Bush, 3/3/01]
...BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS The New York Times reported that "the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes." [The New York Times, 2/6/02]
2. Patient's Right to Sue
GOVERNOR BUSH VETOES PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "Despite his campaign rhetoric in favor of a patients' bill of rights, Bush fought such a bill tooth and nail as Texas governor, vetoing a bill coauthored by Republican state Rep. John Smithee in 1995. He... constantly opposed a patient's right to sue an HMO over coverage denied that resulted in adverse health effects." [Salon, 2/7/01]
...CANDIDATE BUSH PRAISES TEXAS PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "We're one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage... It's time for our nation to come together and do what's right for the people. And I think this is right for the people. You know, I support a national patients' bill of rights, Mr. Vice President. And I want all people covered. I don't want the law to supersede good law like we've got in Texas." [Governor Bush, 10/17/00]
...PRESIDENT BUSH'S ADMINISTRATION ARGUES AGAINST RIGHT TO SUE "To let two Texas consumers, Juan Davila and Ruby R. Calad, sue their managed-care companies for wrongful denials of medical benefits ‘would be to completely undermine' federal law regulating employee benefits, Assistant Solicitor General James A. Feldman said at oral argument March 23. Moreover, the administration's brief attacked the policy rationale for Texas's law, which is similar to statutes on the books in nine other states." [Washington Post, 4/5/04]
3. Tobacco Buyout
BUSH SUPPORTS CURRENT TOBACCO FARMERS' QUOTA SYSTEM... "They've got the quota system in place -- the allotment system -- and I don't think that needs to be changed." [President Bush, 5/04]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION WILL SUPPORT FEDERAL BUYOUT OF TOBACCO QUOTAS "The administration is open to a buyout." [White House spokeswoman Jeanie Mamo, 6/18/04]
4. North Korea
BUSH WILL NOT OFFER NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM... "We developed a bold approach under which, if the North addressed our long-standing concerns, the United States was prepared to take important steps that would have significantly improved the lives of the North Korean people. Now that North Korea's covert nuclear weapons program has come to light, we are unable to pursue this approach." [President's Statement, 11/15/02]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFERS NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM"Well, we will work to take steps to ease their political and economic isolation. So there would be -- what you would see would be some provisional or temporary proposals that would only lead to lasting benefit after North Korea dismantles its nuclear programs. So there would be some provisional or temporary efforts of that nature." [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 6/23/04]
5. Abortion
BUSH SUPPORTS A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE... "Bush said he...favors leaving up to a woman and her doctor the abortion question." [The Nation, 6/15/00, quoting the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, 5/78]
...BUSH OPPOSES A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE "I am pro-life." [Governor Bush, 10/3/00]
6. OPEC
BUSH PROMISES TO FORCE OPEC TO LOWER PRICES... "What I think the president ought to do [when gas prices spike] is he ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say we expect you to open your spigots...And the president of the United States must jawbone OPEC members to lower the price." [President Bush, 1/26/00]
...BUSH REFUSES TO LOBBY OPEC LEADERS With gas prices soaring in the United States at the beginning of 2004, the Miami Herald reported the president refused to "personally lobby oil cartel leaders to change their minds." [Miami Herald, 4/1/04]
7. Iraq Funding
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004... "We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton, 2/2/04]
...BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 "I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops." [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]
8. Condoleeza Rice Testimony
BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'... "Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference." [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]
...BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: "Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony." [President Bush, 3/30/04]
9. Science
BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists—including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents—issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]
10. Ahmed Chalabi
BUSH INVITES CHALABI TO STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS...President Bush also met with Chalabi during his brief trip to Iraq last Thanksgiving [White House Documents 1/20/04, 11/27/03]
...BUSH MILITARY ASSISTS IN RAID OF CHALABI'S HOUSE "U.S. soldiers raided the home of America's one-time ally Ahmad Chalabi on Thursday and seized documents and computers." [Washington Post, 5/20/04]
11. Department of Homeland Security
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
12. Weapons of Mass Destruction
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories...for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons.And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
13. Free Trade
BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]
14. Osama Bin Laden
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA "I don't know where he is.You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him."[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
15. The Environment
BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to...establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]
...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]
16. WMD Commission
BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE "Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]
17. Creation of the 9/11 Commission
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]
18. Time Extension for 9/11 Commission
BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]
19. One Hour Limit for 9/11 Commission Testimony
BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday." [NY Times, 2/26/04]
...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]
20. Gay Marriage
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]
21. Nation Building
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]
22. Saddam/al Qaeda Link
BUSH SAYS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM... "You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." [President Bush, 9/25/02]
...BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11." [President Bush, 9/17/03]
23. U.N. Resolution
BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]
...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]
24. Involvement in the Palestinian Conflict
BUSH OPPOSES SUMMITS... "Well, we've tried summits in the past, as you may remember. It wasn't all that long ago where a summit was called and nothing happened, and as a result we had significant intifada in the area." [President Bush, 04/05/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS SUMMITS "If a meeting advances progress toward two states living side by side in peace, I will strongly consider such a meeting. I'm committed to working toward peace in the Middle East." [President Bush, 5/23/03]
25. Campaign Finance
BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]
...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]
26. 527s
Bush opposes restrictions on 527s: "I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising [in McCain Feingold], which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import." [President Bush, 3/27/02]
…Bush says 527s bad for system: "I don't think we ought to have 527s. I can't be more plain about it…I think they're bad for the system. That's why I signed the bill, McCain-Feingold." [President Bush, 8/23/04]
27. Medical Records
Bush says medical records must remain private: "I believe that we must protect…the right of every American to have confidence that his or her personal medical records will remain private." [President Bush, 4/12/01]
…Bush says patients' histories are not confidntial: The Justice Department…asserts that patients "no longer possess a reasonable expectation that their histories will remain completely confidential." [BusinessWeek, 4/30/04]
28. Timelines For Dictators
Bush sets timeline for Saddam: "If Iraq does not accept the terms within a week of passage or fails to disclose required information within 30 days, the resolution authorizes 'all necessary means' to force compliance--in other words, a military attack." [LA Times, 10/3/02]
…Bush says he's against timelines: "I don't think you give timelines to dictators." [President Bush, 8/27/04]
29. The Great Lakes
Bush wants to divert great lakes: "Even though experts say 'diverting any water from the Great Lakes region sets a bad precedent' Bush 'said he wants to talk to Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien about piping water to parched states in the west and southwest.'– [AP, 7/19/01]
Bush says he'll never divert Great Lakes: "We've got to use our resources wisely, like water. It starts with keeping the Great Lakes water in the Great Lakes Basin...My position is clear: We're never going to allow diversion of Great Lakes water." [President Bush, 8/16/04]
30. Winning The War On Terror
Bush claims he can win the war on terror: "One of the interesting things people ask me, now that we're asking questions, is, can you ever win the war on terror? Of course, you can." [President Bush, 4/13/04]
…Bush says war on terror is unwinnable: "I don't think you can win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/30/04]
…Bush says he will win the war on terror: "Make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/
posted on September 14, 2004 08:18:10 AM new
neroter - To me, I think two of the best arguments to support saddam having womd was first....he used them and no one ever proved he got rid of them. If the UN thought he'd gotten rid of them they/we wouldn't have persued the 12 years they did of inspections, etc.
Second the clinton administration felt he had them [for eight years]...and thought they were bombing a facility where they were stored. AND clinton's many statements that they had them.... even up to the point President Bush took us to war, clinton said he had no way of knowing if they'd been destroyed or not.
Imo, no one is to blame except saddam. Had he given proof he no longer had them....the issue would have been long gone. After 9-11 we no longer could allow the risk saddam had presented for all those years.
On your question to me....I look at it this way. IF I sold you a gun and you murdered somebody...am I responsible for that death? I don't believe I am since you were the one who used it in a way other than I thought you intended to use it.
And my recollection is that the items we gave them was for their researchers to use....not as saddam ended up using them. I can't accept that any person in their right mind would believe we'd share these with some leader we knew intended to use them to kill his own people.
posted on September 14, 2004 09:05:17 AM new
kerry has only 6 weeks left to decide where he really stands on the war. AND I think it's LONG past time that he informs the voters just what HE intends to do instead of just bashing the way President Bush has handled it. LONG past due.
Also I'd like to make note that the cost [what's been spent so far]...is NOT the $200 billion that kerry claims. The amount spent to this week is $120 billion. It most likely will reach $200 billion at some point....but by the time it does...then kerry and the dems will be adding to whatever that true figure is then too.
------------------
[url]
The Massachusetts liberal underscored the ad in speeches last week: "I would not have made the wrong choices that are forcing us to pay nearly the entire cost of this war."
But there are problems with Mr. Kerry's latest attempt to open a new campaign front over Iraq, an issue many Democrats say should not be the focus of his presidential agenda.
First, Mr. Kerry voted for the Senate resolution that clearly approved of going to war in Iraq. Second, nowhere does Mr. Kerry say how he would have reduced the war's costs. Even with support from France, Germany and other countries, our share of the costs would not have changed significantly, Pentagon officials say.
The only way Mr. Kerry could have saved that $200 billion would be if he "chose not to go to war," Howard Kurtz, The Washington Post's ad watch reporter, wrote last week.
Mr. Kerry's ad offensive on Iraq is the product of his new team of Clinton advisers brought in to sharpen his message and stop his freefall in the polls. But the early reviews suggest their strategy is only pushing Mr. Kerry deeper into a quagmire of contradictions and confusion of his own making.
How does Mr. Kerry square his latest statement with an earlier position he would have spent more money for the war? As early as August 2003, Mr. Kerry said on "Meet The Press" that President Bush should "increase" funds for the war "by whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win."
But later, when the $87 billion military funding bill came up, Mr. Kerry voted against it, after having said earlier no one in good conscience could vote against funding for troops sent to fight for our country. Last month, he said if he had it all to do over, he still would vote to go to war. More recently, though, he declared this "the wrong war at the wrong time," a campaign line lifted whole from Howard Dean's 2003 antiwar speeches.
It is difficult to recall a presidential candidate who changed course on a major national security issue as many times as Mr. Kerry has done over the past two years.
Mr. Kerry's flip-flops, as well as his unending concentration on his Vietnam experiences and Iraq, have long been an under-the-radar concern within the party's leadership. Now many Democrats, especially at the state level, are criticizing publicly.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"One thing is for sure: the extremists have faith in our weakness. And the weaker we are, the more they will come after us." --Tony Blair
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"The War on Terror will not be won until America is united. And as long as Democrats target the Bush administration -- not the terrorists -- as the enemy, we are in trouble." --Oliver North
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Those are only two reasons why we need to:
even the dems are saying kerry's got to refocus.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"One thing is for sure: the extremists have faith in our weakness. And the weaker we are, the more they will come after us." --Tony Blair
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"The War on Terror will not be won until America is united. And as long as Democrats target the Bush administration -- not the terrorists -- as the enemy, we are in trouble." --Oliver North
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Those are only two reasons why we need to:
posted on September 14, 2004 09:27:30 AM new
I guess linda has trouble reading any posts but her own. But it's hard reading through the walls of a coccoon.
[ edited by crowfarm on Sep 14, 2004 10:31 AM ]
posted on September 14, 2004 10:27:58 AM new
At least Kerry has a plan to get the United States out of the war and bring home some troops. I have yet to hear anything from Bush on how he will end the war.
DICK CHENEY SUPPORTS MY RELATIONSHIP: People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
posted on September 14, 2004 11:05:01 AM new
At least kerry has a plan? And just what plan would that be? lol
Then logansdad, you REALLY need to write an article and tell all the voters....cause no one except you appears to be able to get an exact answer out of kerry on WHICH of his statements he does plan to put into action .....only that he won't do what President Bush is doing.
Like what - work to protect this nation, as this President has done. kery will take us back to pre-9-11 days where we pretend they mean us no harm even after they've attacked our Nation.
Just look at kerry's recent statements about how he'd handle Iran and North Korea.
He should really be straight with the voters on the Iraq war, instead of continuing to flip-flop back and forth...'we'll fight the war' 'we'll get out' 'we'll win this war' 'It was a wrong war'. This inability to make a decision of just exactly WHAT he WOULD do...is going to guarantee he won't get elected.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"One thing is for sure: the extremists have faith in our weakness. And the weaker we are, the more they will come after us." --Tony Blair
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"The War on Terror will not be won until America is united. And as long as Democrats target the Bush administration -- not the terrorists -- as the enemy, we are in trouble." --Oliver North
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Those are only two reasons why we need to:
posted on September 14, 2004 11:35:57 AM newImo, no one is to blame except saddam. Had he given proof he no longer had them....the issue would have been long gone. After 9-11 we no longer could allow the risk saddam had presented for all those years.
Linda, I suppose this is true. But you have to wonder too, for Iraq and Saddam as a nation, how they felt to be pressured into merely 'disproving it' to another nation such as the U.S.
..
..
~~ Keep thy heart with all diligence for out of it are the issues(forces)of life..Proverbs 4:23~~
posted on September 14, 2004 11:36:22 AM newLike what - work to protect this nation, as this President has done.
The whole world including the US is more unsafe now because of Bush's incompetent actions.
And what is Bush's plan for ending the war? Stay the course..... hahahaha. Seems like he's having a few problems..... remember when he bragged about just a few thugs who were in his way to bringing peace and freedom to Iraq? So what happened? I mentioned last week that over 1000 of his good soldiers are killed and over 7000 are wounded..... just because of a few thugs. Kind of scary if you think about a country with a real army getting pissed off at Bush and going against him too. Or does anyone ever think of things that way?
posted on September 14, 2004 12:32:14 PM new
Linda: At least kerry has a plan? And just what plan would that be? lol
I thought you would say that so I was prepared to provide you with the answer. Here is Kerry's response when asked about the war.
And what is Bush's reponse: We will stay until the mission is accomplished..I thought the mission was accomplished over a year ago.
At least the Kerry is willing to answer questions for the young voters. Unlike the Bush who let's McCain do his talking from him.
From MTV interviews:
Yago: Your exit strategy for Iraq is based on the idea that if you're elected, you'll be able to bring our traditional allies back to the table to help our cause, but what if they say no to you?
Kerry: Well, I have a lot of tools available to me. This president has not done the statesmanship and has not shown the leadership to bring other countries to us. Their resistance to [helping in] Iraq is not only based on Iraq: It's based on the fact that the United States is now pursuing new nuclear weapons, even as we talk about other countries not having them. It's based on the fact that we walked away from the global warming treaty and we dissed 160 nations that worked 10 years to try to build a cooperative attitude. Only the U.S. said "no" and walked away. We haven't paid attention to North Korea, nuclear weapons there. We've ignored AIDS in Africa and elsewhere in the world. So we need to show global, moral, responsible leadership, and if we do that we're going to be far more inviting to other nations to come to our side. In addition, the president has done almost nothing to reduce the increasing clash of radical Islam with moderate Islam and the rest of the world's religions. We need to reach out to people and isolate the fundamentalist extremists and not have them isolate us. That's a big difference. I'll conduct a foreign policy that lives up to America's values, I'll conduct a war that makes America safer, and I will win friends and allies to our side.
Yago: How long do you think American troops are going to have to serve in Iraq?
Kerry: As short a time as possible if I'm president. I would like to get those troops home, and I think I have some ways of beginning to do it. ... I've worked with these leaders of many of these other countries. I know that I can sit down and get them to see our mutual interest in not having a failed Iraq. But it can not be a United States driven, a United States occupied, United States military, United States tax-payer-funded effort. It has to be a more responsible global effort, and I think this president has put our troops at greater risk, I think that he's put the taxpayers at a greater burden, and I think he has not fought a war as safely and as effectively as possible.
Yago: Now, we hear a lot about threats, whether it's al Qaeda, countries like North Korea or Iran. When you're president, how do you determine when to send in troops and use the military?
Kerry: Last resort. When it's necessary to protect the vital security of the United States of America — and I've defended my country as a young man, I've fought in a war — I won't hesitate to defend our nation as president. But I will do it understanding the responsibilities of the commander in chief. I'm never going to send young Americans into war without a plan to win the peace. And I'm going to do it in a way that allows me to look their parents in the eyes if they're lost and say to those parents, "I did everything possible, but the risk to our country was so great we had to do this." I don't believe that was the situation in Iraq, nor do most Americans.
Yago: Do you think another terrorist attack is inevitable?
Kerry: The likelihood is that there will be another terrorist attack, sure. You can't harden every target in America. If someone wants to kill themselves, it's not hard to find a way and a place to do that somehow. The test is whether or not we've done everything possible, executed all the options available to us to make America as safe as possible. I don't believe we've done that today. Our ports are not as secure as they should be. We're not inspecting as many containers as we should to deter problems. We don't have the firehouses with the complement of staff they ought to have, we're cutting cops from the American streets. We don't have the protection of power plants, nuclear and chemical [facilities] that we ought to have. So there's more that we can do to protect America, and I think this president diverted the focus of homeland security and the war on terror in Afghanistan and we're paying an incredible price for that.
DICK CHENEY SUPPORTS MY RELATIONSHIP: People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
Remember when former Sen. Bob Kerrey said that Bill Clinton was an "unusually good liar – unusually good"? Well, surely by now Democrats realize that John Kerry is an unusually bad candidate – unusually bad. Just consider:
* Kerry's never said why he should be president, other than to fulfill a lifelong dream. He inappropriately boasts of his war heroism, when experience tells us that authentic heroes rarely brag about their heroism.
* The Swift Boat Veterans have deeply discredited numerous parts of his Vietnam record, but Kerry hasn't even attempted a factual rebuttal to any of the charges. He has been forced to admit – despite testifying the memory was "seared, seared in me" – he wasn't in Cambodia, Christmas 1968 at the orders of Richard Nixon, who wasn't yet president.
* He's had to virtually admit that no hostile fire accompanied his first Purple Heart incident, meaning he didn't deserve that award.
* He has personally attacked President Bush's National Guard Service and V.P. Cheney's "five deferments" and contrasted it with his volunteering for two tours of duty in Vietnam. But he hasn't answered John O'Neill's charge that his first tour was 100 miles off the shore of Vietnam and he didn't volunteer for service until he was about to be drafted. Besides, who in their right mind would believe that Kerry would volunteer to risk his life in a war he adamantly opposed?
* He either perjured himself in his anti-war testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in admitting to committing atrocities or he actually committed those atrocities, which is worse. POWs have said their communist captors used his slander of our troops against them.
* He was present at a meeting of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War where assassinations of public officials were discussed. Whether or not he voted against them or left the meeting, he has never explained why he associated with such a group of sadistic thugs.
* He admitted to being in Paris and having "talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government." Under whose authority? For what possible legitimate purpose?
* He castigates President Bush – preposterously – for having no plan to win the peace in Iraq. But he's never explained how he would be qualified to plan for any peace, given his disastrous predictions of no bloodbath or refugee problem upon U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam.
* He was rated the most liberal senator in 2003 by the nonpartisan National Journal. And that doesn't even begin to tell the story of his egregiously anti-defense and anti-intelligence record for his entire 20 years in the Senate.
* He has failed to denounce Michael Moore's deceits, but demands that President Bush denounce the Swiftees' truths.
* He insists Iraq isn't part of the War on Terror, yet claims we've lost 1,000 people in the War on Terror.
* He hasn't explained how his Silver Star citation was signed by Navy Secretary John Lehman years after the fact when Lehman denies signing it. He also hasn't explained how a "combat V" was affixed to the citation when such designations never accompany a Silver Star. Where's Dan Rather?
* He refuses to release all his military and medical records and hides behind his biographer Brinkley, who contradicts him saying Kerry alone possesses authority over his records.
* He brutalized V.P. Cheney for saying America would be safer under Bush-Cheney, but in the next breath said he would make America safer.
* He swears he voted for the Iraq war resolution because President Bush promised he'd attack only as a last resort. Since there were no such conditions in the resolution and no one else corroborates his claim, are we to assume Bush gave Kerry these assurances confidentially based on their close friendship?
* He says he won't delegate our national security to other nations, but never stops complaining, essentially, about President Bush's failure to delegate our national security to other nations.
* He claimed foreign leaders prefer him for president. What was he doing talking to them, under whose authority and about what?
* He has been ducking the press for over a month after excoriating President Bush for hiding from the press. He won't answer "hypotheticals" about what he'd do on fundamental issues as president.
* He says he has a plan to withdraw troops, but when pressed admits he won't know enough about the conditions on the ground until he's president.
* He admitted that life begins at conception, but is pro-abortion anyway.
* He has made incredibly destructive and bogus claims about GOP plans to disenfranchise a million black voters.
* He has said President Bush isn't being tough on North Korea, when before Democrats were mortified at his "reckless" saber rattling against that nation.
posted on September 14, 2004 02:33:02 PM new
neroter - But you have to wonder too, for Iraq and Saddam as a nation, how they felt to be pressured into merely 'disproving it' to another nation such as the U.S.
I don't wonder about that at all as I have absolutely no problem seeing who could have prevented this war if he'd lived up to what he agreed to. saddam signed an agreement and the end of the gulf war saying he would get rid of all his womd. He never fulfilled that agreement. For over 12 years he played games with the UN and the US. Read some of what clinton said about this game playing and manipulation of the UN inspectors.
Plus this wasn't only between the US and saddam, it was between the UN and saddam. When the UN security council last voted they voted 15-0 that saddam needed to come clean. He didn't. End of issue...no more million 'second chances'.
posted on September 14, 2004 02:45:27 PM new
GREAT list, bear. Notice how they just continue to blame President Bush for everything and can't address the points in your post.
WHY won't kerry open his military records, sign that 180 or do as President Bush did...give permission for all to be open to the public. It's their double standards again....as it is in each of the points above.
----------------
logansdad - LOL If you think that's an answer from kerry I now understand why you support him. It's NOT an answer. He keeps repeating he 'can't say now' until he's already president...then he'll tell us. What part of that don't you get?
President Bush has said how long we're going to be there. As long as it takes...or until the Iraqi government asks us to leave.
kerry, meanwhile pretty much lets the voters know he has no plan he's willing to share and that he'll most likely only attack IF we've been attacked AGAIN. President Bush is working so that DOESN'T happen on our ground again.
Allies like France, Germany and Russia aren't going to come into Iraq with troops....heck they have so few troops of their own they could barely defend their own country. And they've stated they won't either. They haven't stated they'd help in Iraq under a kerry presidency. He's only promising MORE of what he can't deliver.
It's like bears post mentioned: He says he has a plan to withdraw troops, but when pressed admits he won't know enough about the conditions on the ground until he's president. So one month it's send in more troops, the next month it's withdraw troops, and on and on. You can't trust a thing that comes out of his mouth. Even HE doesn't know what he'll do...and that's why my first article was written...to outline kerrys past positions and how they just keep changing.
Like President Bush said a while back...he'll debate kerry when he's through debating himself. Nothings changed in that way.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"One thing is for sure: the extremists have faith in our weakness. And the weaker we are, the more they will come after us." --Tony Blair
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"The War on Terror will not be won until America is united. And as long as Democrats target the Bush administration -- not the terrorists -- as the enemy, we are in trouble." --Oliver North
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Those are only two reasons why we need to:
posted on September 14, 2004 04:16:24 PM new
Kerry is losing because he has no platform but his questionable military record and Theresa's money. Hey, hey Ho, ho Kerry - sign the 1-8-0
posted on September 14, 2004 04:21:24 PM newPresident Bush has said how long we're going to be there. As long as it takes...or until the Iraqi government asks us to leave
Linda that is no strategy to end the war. That is Bush's stupid reasoning. I suppose if Bush would stay in Iraq for another 30 years if he could.....we will stay the course he says........30 years and 10,000 troops later he would still be saying the same stupid thing. Is it still worth it. NO
Go ahead support your village idiot.
Bush went into the war with no plan and he has no plan for exiting the war.
DICK CHENEY SUPPORTS MY RELATIONSHIP: People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
