posted on September 17, 2004 11:56:13 AM new
Supporters Of Kerry Blindly Support Him, Ignore Reality, Record
In the eyes of Democrats, John Kerry can do no wrong. They don't judge him on what he has done, but only on what he promises to do, blindly ignoring reality, his inconsistent record and the hard facts of his 20-year voting history.
He supported ousting Saddam Hussein for years, but ran for office as the antiwar candidate, and now claims he's tough on defense. He was against the war in Iraq, but voted for it, then against the money to fight it with.
He was against gay marriage, then for it, and now censures the San Francisco mayor who sanctioned it. He says he is Catholic, and believes that life begins at conception, but is also pro-abortion, which Catholics oppose.
He claims he served heroically in Vietnam (just check out his home movies), but immediately converted to rabid war protester on his return. Though he accused himself and his fellow servicemen of heinous war crimes, he now claims to be a war hero, and uses the same men he then condemned as character references today. He reportedly threw away his medals in protest, but they now magically adorn his Senate office wall.
He testified before Congress, and elsewhere, that he was in Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968, which proved false. He also blamed President Richard Nixon for sending him there and lying about it, when LBJ was president at the time.
Kerry claims to be an American patriot, but is honored in the Hanoi War Museum as a foreign activist who helped the communists defeat the U.S. in Vietnam. He has also been officially endorsed by the U.S. Communist Party.
He promises to represent the common man, but has no clue about real life. He was born to wealth and privilege, is worth millions, is married to a billionaire and has no real life experience. He has accepted millions from powerful special-interest groups, and votes consistently against proposals of concern to the middle class.
He hypocritically denounces big corporations that "outsource" their jobs to save on labor costs, while he and his wife are equally guilty – most Heinz ketchup factories are located overseas. He also condemns gas-guzzling vehicles, but drives SUVs and owns yachts and jet planes, all notorious with conservationists.
He preaches against making military service an issue, except for his own, which he's made the centerpiece of his campaign. Now he is trying to silence those 60 pesky eye witnesses and the 254 combat mates who dispute his claims of heroism.
Instead of addressing their allegations, Kerry has now filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission to stifle the swift boat vets' freedom of speech, and has also threatened the publishers of their book and the stations playing their ads with lawsuits.
Kerry claims to be strong on defense, but voted against every major military appropriations bill since 1988, including battle armor for our troops. He pledges to upgrade our intelligence agencies, but voted to kill all antiterrorist activity of every agency of the U.S. government, including slashing funding of the FBI by 60 percent, of the CIA by 80 percent and of the NSA by 80 percent. He promises to be tough on terrorism, but while on the Senate Intelligence Committee he missed almost 80 percent of committee hearings, and is now "too busy" to attend the terrorist-update sessions offered by President George W. Bush.
John Kerry is obviously unqualified to be president, but his supporters are so blinded by fanatic anti-Bush hatred, they have completely lost their objectivity. They overlook the discrepancies between his past votes and present promises, dismiss the contradictions and ignore the lies. Blind faith may have its place, but not in the election for president of the United States.
posted on September 17, 2004 12:17:09 PM new
What amuses me is the elitism the liberal leaders blatantly practice. They can justify any extravagance for themselves, but belittle others for wanting a taste of the good life.
I recently read an interview with Jay Leno in which the woman doing the interview stated, in a question to Jay, "...the average American is a moron..." . He just took THAT comment in stride, as a given, and responded to the question. The interview was at Jay's request to dispel the notion that he is a conservative. That right there let me know how he thinks. And I searched for the interview again and couldn't find it, darn it.
Liberals don't mind standing in line to get in a hoity toity restaurant or club. A conservative will shake their head and go down the street and get a brew and a sausage at the local pub, then go back to work.
I am not necessarily voting for Bush, just for the most viable candidate opposing Kerry.
posted on September 17, 2004 12:40:09 PM new
Well, having seen--and cringed at--the Jay Walking segments of his show, I can see why he let the comment slide by without comment.
____________________
"Bad temper is its own scourge. Few things are more bitter than to feel bitter. A man's venom poisons himself more than his victim." --Charles Buxton
posted on September 17, 2004 12:55:47 PM new
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
posted on September 17, 2004 01:15:17 PM new
parklane64 said, "Liberals don't mind standing in line to get in a hoity toity restaurant or club. A conservative will shake their head and go down the street and get a brew and a sausage at the local pub, then go back to work."
That is the most ass backwards statement I ever heard from a Republican Bush supporter. It just shows how out of reality and touch parklane64 really is. I am betting from his statement about pubs that parklane64 doesn't even know where to find a real local pub that serves real (home made) sausage and a good stiff drink. If he did stumble across one he would be afraid to go in.
Thanks parklane64 you gave me the laugh of the day.
posted on September 17, 2004 01:22:25 PM newA conservative will shake their head and go down the street and get a brew and a sausage at the local pub, then go back to work."
Isn't more like a conservative to go get drunk at their local pub and then go down the street to a church and pray to God they don't get a DUI while driving home or pray to God they do not get the woman they picked up pregnant?
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 17, 2004 04:41:55 PM new
The Kerry Conundrum
Can he pass the commander-in-chief test?
Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT
In his physical bearing, John Kerry is notably Presidential, all angles and definition. It is his political profile that blurs, with shifting votes and elusive convictions. The Democratic nominee's challenge in his acceptance speech tonight is to define his political character and demonstrate that he can be trusted as commander in chief in a post-9/11 world.
The Kerry campaign clearly understands this problem, because it has made "strength" and "security" the theme of its convention week. The word "strong" has been repeated so many times that it reminds us of the old joke about the politician who kept calling himself "the issues candidate" so no one would notice that he had no issues.
In pitching Mr. Kerry to be commander in chief, his campaign is also stressing the personal. Just as he captained that swift boat in Vietnam, he can lead the country now in dangerous times. Americans can be confident he'll use force against our enemies because he was willing to fight (and kill) in the Mekong Delta. But because he also knows first-hand the horror of war, he will not be as "reckless" as President Bush. "Strength" and "wisdom," as Bill Clinton put it on Monday--an alluring argument.
Yet surely we all know that personal bravery is not the same as political leadership. The doubts about Mr. Kerry concern not his courage but his judgment and conviction, and have been formed as the result of public service that is far longer than his admirable four months in Vietnam. Those doubts are both political and philosophical.
On the latter, Mr. Kerry has simply been wrong about the major national security questions of his time. Leaving aside the special case of Vietnam, the Senator voted against nearly every major weapons system during the Cold War. He supported the recklessly naive "nuclear freeze" in 1984. He opposed SDI, which convinced the Soviets they couldn't win an arms race. He even opposed the invasion of Grenada at the time, though he now says that is the kind of operation he would support. In other words, he was a stalwart of the dovish wing of the Democratic Party that voters refused to entrust with the Presidency from Vietnam until the Berlin Wall fell.
More recently, Senator Kerry voted against the first Gulf War, arguing that diplomacy was enough to remove Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. This vote strikes us as especially noteworthy now that Kerry supporters are trying to portray him as a foreign policy "realist" in the mold of George H.W. Bush, and in contrast to the current President. Yet when the senior Bush sought to use military force in the U.S. national interest, Mr. Kerry opposed that too.
Post 9/11 this is all a political liability, and Mr. Kerry now points to Kosovo, Bosnia and Haiti as examples of military actions he supported. But in political terms they were easier cases. The Democratic Party was solidly in favor, as were many conservatives, including us. The question today is whether and how Mr. Kerry would respond when the intelligence might not be certain, the costs might be high and the U.N. isn't unanimous.
Mr. Kerry says that unlike Mr. Bush he'll bring the allies along in support of U.S. action, and it's tempting to believe that a new President could somehow rally the French and Germans back to our side. But this ignores our diverging strategic interests. The French want the U.N. to become a brake on the U.S. "hyperpower," and much of Europe would rather appease Islamic terror than fight it. This won't change merely because Americans elect a new President, and it would be nice to hear Mr. Kerry say he understands this.
Then there is his ever-shifting views on Iraq. He voted for the war when that seemed safer politically in October 2002. But then when Howard Dean was on the march in this year's Democratic primaries, the Senator turned into a vociferous war critic and voted against the $87 billion to finish the job in Iraq. Mr. Kerry has an elaborate justification for this vote, but we agree with Senator Joe Biden, a Kerry supporter who described that vote recently to the New Yorker as "tactical" and an attempt "to prove to Dean's guys I'm not a warmonger."
Now that he's won the nomination, Mr. Kerry has once again turned moderately hawkish. He assails the President's management of the war but proposes more or less the same policy. We give him credit for saying he won't withdraw abruptly from Iraq and leave a failed state, but he also leads a center-left coalition that will pressure him to do precisely that as costs rise and compete with domestic priorities. All in all, it is hard to resist the conclusion that if John Kerry had been President the last four years, Saddam would still be running Iraq.
We have little doubt that a Kerry Administration would pursue Osama bin Laden to the ends of the earth. The doubts run to what he would do in the hard cases when Presidential fortitude and leadership are required. Whatever else they think of Mr. Bush, Americans know he is willing to act in our national defense. They'll be trying to judge tonight, and over the next three months, if they can depend on John Kerry to do the same.