posted on September 23, 2004 04:30:25 PM new
John Kerry showed up for an interview with NPR yesterday, and Robert Siegel of "All Things Considered" actually managed--though not without considerable struggle--to pin him down on a point regarding Iraq. Here's our transcript (hat tip: blogger H.D. Miller):
http://travellingshoes.blogspot.com/2004_09_19_travellingshoes_archive.html#109591113327061182
Siegel: What do you do if you ask the Joint Chiefs of Staff what they need to achieve their mission in Iraq and they say, "We need a lot more troops"? Do you escalate the troop levels, or do you plan for a quick or a constant exit instead?
Kerry: You have to support our troops, and you have to do what's necessary to try to make this mission successful, but they have not asked for that. I have to wait until I'm president and sit down with them and see where we are.
Siegel: But you yourself have pointed out that Gen. Shinseki, the former Army chief of staff, said there should be hundreds of thousands of troops in Iraq, and you say he was fired for saying that. What if you get now the "real story," as you would say, the Army speaking candidly--
Kerry: I'll have to make a decision when I get there as to what the probabilities are. I can't hypothesize as to what I am going to find on Jan. 20--whether I'm going to find a Lebanon or whether I'm going to find a country that's moving towards an election. That depends on what the president does now.
Siegel: But--
Kerry: I think the leadership has been arrogant and disastrous.
Siegel: But should either you or whoever is president next year consider the possibility of an increase in troops? Is that even a consideration, or should it be completely off the table?
Kerry: I do not intend to increase troops. I intend to get the process in place that I described, and I believe as a new president, with new credibility, with a fresh start, that I have the ability to be able to change the dynamics on the ground.
So finally, after asking the question three times, Siegel gets an answer out of Kerry: "I do not intend to increase troops," even if that's what the generals say is necessary. (Note: This column, like Kerry, takes no position on the appropriate troop strength in Iraq, so please don't vote for us either.) He goes on to imply that it won't be necessary, because simply by being John Kerry, he will "be able to change the dynamics on the ground."
Kerry rules out more Iraq troops
From correspondents in Washington
September 23, 2004
DEMOCRATIC presidential candidate John Kerry, who has warned of deepening chaos in Iraq, said today he would not send additional US troops even if turmoil persists into next year.
In an interview with National Public Radio, Mr Kerry reiterated "there's no way" he would have gone to war knowing Saddam Hussein posed no imminent threat with weapons of mass destruction and had no ties to al-Qaeda terrorists.
Mr Kerry said the US could not cut-and-run after the March 2003 invasion. "Not having a failed state in Iraq, it seems to me, is important to our country's security," he said.
But he virtually closed the door on sending additional US troops to Iraq if he has no success in his plan to replace some of the 140,000 US personnel with soldiers from other countries and Iraqi security forces.
"I do not intend to increase troops," said the Massachusetts senator, running in the November 2 election to unseat President George W. Bush.
"I intend to get the process in place that I described and I believe as a new president, with new credibility, with a fresh start, that I have the ability to be able to change the dynamics on the ground."
Mr Kerry again recognised that there was little immediate enthusiasm among other countries for sending troops to Iraq but blamed this on what he called Mr Bush's inept and "arrogant" diplomacy.
"This president has so little credibility and so little ability to bring those countries to our side that you can't do it," he said. "I acknowledge it is a difficult task. But it is the only way, ultimately, to be successful."
But the Democrat's staunch refusal to consider sending more US troops contrasted with his remarks in a televised interview in April, when he also spoke of resistance among US allies to putting boots on the ground in Iraq.
"If it requires more troops in order to create the stability that eliminates the chaos that can provide the groundwork for other countries, that's what we have to do," he said on NBC's Meet the Press.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The person who has nothing for which he is willing
to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill
posted on September 23, 2004 06:31:35 PM new
I cannot believe that a man who continues to flip-flop on what he will or will not do...is not judged to be suffering from some sort of split personality. Sure looks that way to me. He's been all over the map on what he will or won't do. Can't keep up with all the changes of decision making he does. Obviously not qualified to be making decisions for all our important issues...he can't even do that on this one.
He's jk on one day then turns into his twin who opposes what he's said before.
Notice from your article...even in the same day...he can't say what he'd do....but then he says he'll not send more troops even if they're requested. When he's been going on and on and on that more troops are needed over there and President Bush won't send them.
This man has lost it...big time...truly - this is NO joke. This is VERY scary. Never has there been such an indecisive man running for president of the US.
No wonder the lefties can't defend him on all these flip-flops....they're really indefensible. This, I'm sure has set a record for the number of times a man has changed himself on one position in such a short time frame.
But it's kerry being kerry again...voted to send our troops to war....but screw giving them what they need - just like he did with the needed funding. What a pathetic joke and weakling kerry is.
posted on September 23, 2004 07:19:10 PM new
Don't be sad, kiara.
This is exactly the reason kerry won't be re-elected. People can see he's unable to make a decision, take a stand on the issues and keep them for more than a few weeks or so. And on the other issues he just blames.....and like this interview tells us he'll let us know what he's going to do AFTER he's elected.
"Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don´t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president." - john kerry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"These dizzying contradictions -- so glaring, so public, so frequent -- have gone beyond undermining anything Kerry can now say on Iraq. They have been transmuted into a character issue."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"What kind of man, aspiring to the presidency, does not know his own mind about the most serious issue of our time?" - Charles Krauthammer
------------
posted on September 23, 2004 07:30:42 PM new
Sorry Twelve. All I can say is "I voted for it before I voted against it".
Hey, hey Ho, ho Kerry - sign the 1-8-0
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The person who has nothing for which he is willing
to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill
posted on September 23, 2004 07:37:36 PM new
Bear, he did not say "I do not intend to increase troops" unless you take it out of context. With the process he describes he will have more cooperation with other nations. With international cooperation there will be a much larger menu to choose from. I realize this is a concept that is foreign to neonazis, er I mean neocons, though I certainly haven't figured out the difference between the two, other than the time frame in which they have both risen to power. Heil Bush.
I will also add that the reason Florida has seen so many hurricanes this year is because God is mad at Florida' votes going to Herr Bush. He is even sending Ivan back to Texas for emphasis.
posted on September 23, 2004 08:28:27 PM new
kerry said this....reported by USAToday.
He also said that "if it requires more troops in order to create the stability that eliminates the chaos" discouraging the United Nations and other countries from helping, "that's what we have to do."
He's flip-flopped again since 4-19-04......no mistaking what he said at all.
"Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don´t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president." - john kerry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"These dizzying contradictions -- so glaring, so public, so frequent -- have gone beyond undermining anything Kerry can now say on Iraq. They have been transmuted into a character issue."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"What kind of man, aspiring to the presidency, does not know his own mind about the most serious issue of our time?" - Charles Krauthammer
------------
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 23, 2004 08:32 PM ]
posted on September 23, 2004 08:47:18 PM new
And in May 2004 calling for 40,000 troops - 20,000 to be sent to Iraq
Kerry Calls for More Troops in Iraq, Bolstering U.S. Military
May 28 (Bloomberg) --
Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry called for 40,000 more U.S. troops in Iraq, saying he would ``modernize our military to match its new missions´´ in the war on terror and homeland security.
``I make this simple pledge,´´ Kerry said in remarks prepared for delivery to veterans and military families in Green Bay, Wisconsin. ``If I am President, I will fight for a constant standard of decency and respect for those who serve their country in our armed forces - on active duty and as veterans.´´
The extra troops are needed in Iraq to ease pressure on soldiers and National Guard troops battling insurgents in the Middle Eastern country. Half of the 40,000 troops would be used as military police and for civil affairs, tasks now mainly carried out by reservists, while the other 20,000 would be combat troops, Kerry said.
I don't understand why ANYONE would have trouble finding all kinds of quotes with kerry said we need to send more troops to Iraq. Maybe that's why they're kerry supporters....they just overlook what he's said in the past...and cling to his most recent reversals.
"Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don´t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president." - john kerry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"These dizzying contradictions -- so glaring, so public, so frequent -- have gone beyond undermining anything Kerry can now say on Iraq. They have been transmuted into a character issue."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"What kind of man, aspiring to the presidency, does not know his own mind about the most serious issue of our time?" - Charles Krauthammer
------------
posted on September 23, 2004 09:00:54 PM new
Is kerry for or against the Iraq war? Depends on the day he's asked.
Is kerry for more troops in Iraq or against sending more troops there? We never really know...he changes his mind way too often.
Here's a good example of kerry's mood changes:
APRIL 13, 2004: Kerry Writes, "If Our Military Commanders Request More Troops, We Should Deploy Them." "But to maximize our chances for success, and to minimize the risk of failure, we must make full use of the assets we have. If our military commanders request more troops, we should deploy them. Progress is not possible in Iraq if people lack the security to go about the business of daily life." (Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed, "A Strategy For Iraq," The Washington Post, 4/13/04)
FIVE DAYS LATER: Kerry Calls For More Troops If Needed. SEN. JOHN KERRY: "I believe the following very deeply. Number one, we cannot fail. I've said that many times. And if it requires more troops in order to create the stability that eliminates the chaos, that can provide the groundwork for other countries, that's what you have to do." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 4/18/04)
12 DAYS LATER: Kerry Says He Believes More American Troops Should Be Sent To Iraq If Commanders "Need More." "In the short term ... in the short term, if our commanders believe they need more American troops, then they should say so, and they should get them and get what they need." (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Westminster College, Fulton, MO, 4/30/04)
ONE MONTH LATER: When Asked When He'd Bring Home Troops, Kerry Says He'll "Have To See Where We Are On The Ground." "Asked by an opponent of the war Friday what he planned to do to bring the troops home from Iraq, John Kerry was careful about what he said and what he didn't say. 'I don't know where Iraq will be on Jan. 20 next year when I'm inaugurated,' said Kerry, the partisan audience cheering his self-confidence about the election. 'I'll have to see where we are on the ground,' he said of the occupation." (Craig Gilbert, "Kerry Chooses Words Carefully," Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 5/29/04)
SAME DAY: Kerry Says He'll Bring Home Troops "As Fast As Possible." "Senator John Kerry promised an occasionally tearful gathering of soldiers, veterans and their families here on Friday that as president he would bring the troops home from Iraq 'as fast as possible.'" (Robin Toner, "Kerry Redoubles His Attack Over the War," The New York Times, 5/29/04)
THREE DAYS LATER: On Memorial Day Kerry Says He Could Bring Home Troops Sooner Than Bush Could. "[S]en. John Kerry, said that if elected he could get American troops home from Iraq sooner than Bush would." (Pete Yost, "In Face Of Differing Views Over U.N. Resolution, Bush Calls German Chancellor," The Associated Press, 6/1/04)
TWO MONTHS LATER: In His Convention Acceptance Speech, Kerry Failed To Say When He Would Bring Troops Home. "Notably, Kerry didn't say when he'd bring U.S. troops home." (David Yepsen, Op-Ed, "Tough Rhetoric Peppers Kerry's Acceptance Speech," The Des Moines Register, 7/30/04)
ONE WEEK LATER: Kerry Will Bring Troops Home "Within A Year." "In an NPR interview Friday [August 6th], Kerry said: 'I believe that within a year from now, we could significantly reduce American forces in Iraq, and that's my plan.' His comments took several aides by surprise. Until the interview, Kerry's stated policy was to significantly reduce troops by the end of his first term." (Jim VandeHei and Mary Fitzgerald, "Kerry Defends Position On Iraq," The Washington Post, 8/8/04)
TWO DAYS LATER: Kerry Pledged To "Significantly" Reduce Troops In Iraq Within Six Months Of Taking Office. "Kerry and Rubin also are detailing a new Iraq policy to 'significantly' reduce the number of U.S. troops in Iraq during the first six months of a Kerry administration." (Jim VandeHei and Mary Fitzgerald, "Kerry Defends Position On Iraq," The Washington Post, 8/8/04)
ONE DAY LATER: Kerry Said Troop Level Depends On Commanders' Needs. "Yesterday, he again said he hoped troops would be home within a year. 'If the commanders asked for it, then you'd have to respond to what the commanders asked for,' Kerry said. 'But my goal, my diplomacy, my statesmanship, is to get our troops reduced in number . . . over that period of time. Obviously, we have to see how events unfold.' He said his conditions for reducing troops in Iraq would be the country's stability, the 'training and transformation' of the Iraqi national security force, and Baghdad's ability to hold elections." (Patrick Healy, "Kerry Says He'd Still Vote To Authorize Iraq War," The Boston Globe, 8/10/04)
THREE WEEKS LATER: Kerry Says Goal As President Would Be To Bring Home Troops In His First Four-Year Term. "'We want those troops home, and my goal would be to try to get them home in my first term,' Kerry said, speaking to a fellow Vietnam War veteran at a campaign stop in Pennsylvania who had asked about a timetable for withdrawal." (Calvin Woodward, "Kerry Slams 'Wrong War In The Wrong Place'," Associated Press Online, 9/7/04)
----------------------
Like President Bush said - [paraphrasing here] "I'll debate kerry when he's through debating himself." Still holds true to this day.
"Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don´t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president." - john kerry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"These dizzying contradictions -- so glaring, so public, so frequent -- have gone beyond undermining anything Kerry can now say on Iraq. They have been transmuted into a character issue."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"What kind of man, aspiring to the presidency, does not know his own mind about the most serious issue of our time?" - Charles Krauthammer
------------
posted on September 23, 2004 10:47:19 PM new
Getalife, did you read the transcriot & listen to the audio. Kerry DID SAY[i]I do not intend to increase troops[/b]. Nothing to be take out of context when quoting him verbatem.
Hey, hey Ho, ho Kerry - sign the 1-8-0
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The person who has nothing for which he is willing
to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill
posted on September 30, 2004 08:20:50 AM new
Mood changes?
April 13th- Kerry says he will listen to our military commanders when deciding whether or not to send more troops. "Progress is not possible in Iraq if people lack the security to go about the business of daily life."
FIVE days later- Kerry calls for more troops if needed. "We cannot fail and if that requires more troops in order to create the stability of that and eliminates the chaos, that's what you have to do".
12 DAYS LATER- Kerry says he believes more American troops should be sent to Iraq , if commanders need more.
ONE MONTH LATER- Asked when he'd bring troops home Kerry says he'll "Have to see where we are on the ground."
Same Day- Kerry says he'll bring troops home "as fast as possible"
THREE DAYS LATER- John Kerry said if elected , he could get American troops home from Iraq sooner than Bush would.
TWO Months Later- Kerry fail to say when he would bring troops home.
ONE WEEK LATER- Kerry will bring troops home within a year. "I believe that within a year from now, we could significantly reduce American forces in Iraq".
TWO DAYS LATER-Kerry pledged to significantly reduce troops in Iraq within six months of taking office- Kerry and Rubin also are detailing a NEW Iraq policy to significantly reduce the number of US troops in Iraq during the first six months of the Kerry administration.
ONE DAY LATER- Kerry said Troop level depends on commanders needs. "If the commanders asked for it, then you would have to respond to what the commanders asked for- BUT my GOAL is to get our troops reduced in number over that period of time. Obviously, we have to see how events unfold." He said his conditions for reducing troops in Iraq would be the Country's STABILITY, the training and transformation of the Iraqi national security force, and Baghdad's ability to hold elections.
Translation:
KERRY'S POSITION ON MORE TROOPS: IF THE MILITARY COMMANDERS SAY THEY NEED MORE TROOPS, HE'LL SEND MORE TROOPS. The Goal? To stabilize the "Democracy" of Iraq- Why?
So we can bring our troops home. Somebody please show me the flip-flop here!!
WHEN WILL KERRY BRING THE TROOPS HOME? As soon as we stabilize Iraq- How long will it take? Why don't we ask Mr. Bush, he surely must have an end strategy, right? Anyone have a clue what it is?! He can't really believe HIS "MISSION" was "accomplished" What was the reason he waged war again? 1.Weapons of Mass destruction- Oops, "bad intel" try again- 2. Saddam is a BAD man- true, but there's lots of bad men in the world, are we going to take over every country whose leader is a "bad man"? Oops, not enough troops for that- 3. Saddam was involved in 9/11- Oops, you mean the terrorist were mostly Saudis (Bush family buddies) and none of them were Iraqi's?- we'd hate to confuse the American people with the real "facts"- He finally settled on door number 4. bringing "Democracy" to the Iraqi people, whether they like it or not!!
So, as you can clearly see, John Kerry understands the mission and you can't pull a date out of the hat that it will be accomplished on! It's a ridiculous question to even ask- why are we so concerned that Kerry can't pinpoint a date for us? would we rather hear "let's see, I know I'll bring the troops home on April 11, 2005, yea that's the ticket"!
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. Speak what you think today in words as hard as cannon-balls and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said today." Ralph Waldo Emerson
posted on September 30, 2004 08:36:28 AM new
katrinka, you are absolutely right....this dilema bush has got us into cannot have a date stamped on it...
I saw no discrepancies in what Kerry says in your post.
HOWEVER, One of the possible "October Surprises" could be bush putting a date on troop withdrawal......he uses that to get elected ....and then after the election....he flip flops and says, "Well, there was a miscalculation....we had bad information....the troops will have to be there longer....now watch my golf swing!"
posted on September 30, 2004 11:00:00 AM new
ROFL @ the denial going on here BIG TIME. Oh brother....lol
If it's ridiculous
to ask when kerry will bring out troops home, then it's even more ridiculous that he's answered with:
'in my first term' [stated over and over and over]
'in one year' [stated several times]
'in six months'
and then back to within my first term'
LOL They man is incompetent and unable to make up his own mind, let alone to be allowed to run this country.
Same thing goes with his constant flip-flopping on supporting the war....then not supporting the troops financially....then backing President Bush wholeheartedly...then not supporting the war....then he says there were womd and saddam needed to be removed - he supported President Bush's actions...then 'even knowing what I know now.. -[no womd found] I would STILL have voted the same way....to then 'it's the wrong war, etc'.
kerry's got MAJOR problems making a decision and sticking with them. That's flip-flopping and there's no way it can be denied. But it's funny watching some try.
posted on September 30, 2004 11:17:39 AM new
Just as much fun as linduh avoiding this post!
Did SOMEONE mention flip-flopping ???
posted on September 12, 2004 06:39:04 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
. 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 30, 2004 01:20:20 PM new
Linda K- I would be delighted if you would give me a flat out, honest answer to the following compound question-
Are any of the media asking Bush when he'll get us out of the mess he's put us in AND if so what date did he state he'd bring our troops home?
I always love a good debate, I hope you feel the same!
posted on September 30, 2004 02:10:09 PM new
Kerry has maintained a consistent position toward the Iraq war. I doubt that you can read and comprehend this article, linda but for others here it explains Kerry's consistent position on the Iraq war. He voted to give George Bush the discretion that Kerry believed that he should have but Bush misused that vote of confidence by not following normal procedure. As Kerry stated, "It was a vote to go through the process of going to the U.N., building the allies and then making a judgment of whether we had to go."
Taken out of context Kerry said...."I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it," a line that the Bush campaign used in commercials to mock Kerry for inconsistency. The truth is that Kerry voted for a version of the bill that would have raised the $87 billion by repealing Bush's income tax cut for people making over $300,000 a year. When that measure failed, Kerry voted against the $87 billion on final passage. That vote was a protest against a war with no plan for peace and for fiscal irresponsibility. Now, we can see that John Kerry was right.
katrinka3254.... Maybe now, Linda K will answer your question.
posted on September 30, 2004 02:17:19 PM newAre any of the media asking Bush when he'll get us out of the mess he's put us in AND if so what date did he state he'd bring our troops home?
This question has been asked to Bush and Bush's reponse has always been "we will stay the course". Bush can never give a straight answer because he has no idea when the war "will be over" even though he declared "mission accomplished" over a year ago.
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.
------------------------------
