posted on September 30, 2004 01:35:10 PM
Bush Ad Twists Kerry's Words on Iraq
Selective use of Kerry's own words makes him look inconsistent on Iraq. A closer look gives a different picture.
Summary
Kerry has never wavered from his support for giving Bush authority to use force in Iraq, nor has he changed his position that he, as President, would not have gone to war without greater international support. But a Bush ad released Sept. 27 takes many of Kerry's words out of context to make him appear to be alternately praising the war and condemning it.
Here we present this highly misleading ad, along with what Kerry actually said, in full context.
Analysis
This ad is the most egregious example so far in the 2004 campaign of using edited quotes in a way that changes their meaning and misleads voters.
"Right Decision"
Kerry is shown saying it was "the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein." What's left out is that he prefaced that by saying Bush should have made greater use of diplomacy to accomplish that.
The quote is from May 3, 2003, at the first debate among Democratic presidential contenders, barely three weeks after the fall of Baghdad. The question was from ABC's George Stephanopoulos:
Q: And Senator Kerry, the first question goes to you. On March 19th, President Bush ordered General Tommy Franks to execute the invasion of Iraq. Was that the right decision at the right time?
Kerry: George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.
(Note: We have added the emphasis in these and the following quotes to draw attention to the context left out by the Bush ad.)
"As he should have"
The full "right decision" quote is actually quite consistent with the next Kerry quote, "I don't believe the President took us to war as he should have," which is from an interview with Chris Matthews on MSNBC's "Hardball" program Jan. 6, 2004:
Q: Do you think you belong to that category of candidates who more or less are unhappy with this war, the way it's been fought, along with General Clark, along with Howard Dean and not necessarily in companionship politically on the issue of the war with people like Lieberman, Edwards and Gephardt? Are you one of the anti-war candidates?
Kerry: I am -- Yes, in the sense that I don't believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely. Do I think this president violated his promises to America? Yes, I do, Chris.
Q: Let me...
Kerry: Was there a way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable? You bet there was, and we should have done it right.
"Winning of the war was brilliant"
When Kerry said "the winning of the war was brilliant" he wasn't praising Bush for waging the war, he was praising the military for the way they accomplished the mission. He also repeated his criticism of Bush for failing to better plan for what came next. This was also on "Hardball," May 19:
Q: All this terrorism. If you were president, how would you stop it?
Kerry: Well, it's going to take some time to stop it, Chris, but we have an enormous amount of cooperation to build one other countries. I think the administration is not done enough of the hard work of diplomacy, reaching out to nations, building the kind of support network.
I think they clearly have dropped the ball with respect to the first month in the after -- winning the war. That winning of the war was brilliant and superb, and we all applaud our troops for doing what they did, but you've got to have the capacity to provide law and order on the streets and to provide the fundamentally services, and I believe American troops will be safer and America will pay less money if we have a broader coalition involved in that, including the United Nations.
"Wrong war, wrong place"
When Kerry called Iraq "the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time" he was once again criticizing Bush for failing to get more international support before invading Iraq. He criticized Bush for what he called a "phony coalition" of allies:
Kerry (Sept 6, 2004): You've got about 500 troops here, 500 troops there, and it's American troops that are 90 percent of the combat casualties, and it's American taxpayers that are paying 90 percent of the cost of the war . . . It's the wrong war, in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Earlier that same day at another campaign appearance he repeated pretty much what he's said all along:
Kerry (Sept 6, 2004): "I would not have done just one thing differently than the president on Iraq, I would have done everything differently than the president on Iraq. I said this from the beginning of the debate to the walk up to the war. I said, 'Mr. President, don't rush to war, take the time to build a legitimate coalition and have a plan to win the peace ."
We May Find WMDs
Nine months of fruitless searching have gone by since Kerry said on Dec. 14, 2003 that weapons of mass destruction might yet be found in Iraq. But what's most misleading about the Bush ad's editing is that it takes that remark out of a long-winded -- but still consistent -- explanation of Kerry's overall position on Iraq:
The exchange was on Fox News Sunday, with host Chris Wallace:
Q: But isn't it, in a realistic political sense going to be a much harder case to make to voters when you have that extraordinary mug shot of Saddam Hussein...looking like he's been dragged into a police line-up?
Kerry: Absolutely not, because I voted to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. I knew we had to hold him accountable. There's never been a doubt about that. But I also know that if we had done this with a sufficient number of troops, if we had done this in a globalized way, if we had brought more people to the table, we might have caught Saddam Hussein sooner. We might have had less loss of life. We would be in a stronger position today with respect to what we're doing.
Look, again, I repeat, Chris, I have always said we may yet even find weapons of mass destruction. I don't know the answer to that. We will still have to do the job of rebuilding Iraq and resolving the problem between Shias and Sunnis and Kurds. There are still difficult steps ahead of us.
The question that Americans want to know is, what is the best way to proceed? Not what is the most lonely and single-track ideological way to proceed. I believe the best way to proceed is to bring other countries to the table, get some of our troops out of the target, begin to share the burden.
The $87 Billion
The final quote is the one in which the Bush ad takes its best shot. Kerry not only said it, he did it. He voted for an alternative resolution that would have approved $87 billion in emergency funds for troops and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan, but it was conditioned on repealing much of Bush's tax cuts, and it failed 57-42. On the key, up-or-down vote on the $87 billion itself Kerry was only one of 12 senators in opposition, along with the man who later become his running mate, Sen. John Edwards.
It's not only Bush who criticizes Kerry's inconsistency on that vote. Rival Democratic presidential candidate Joe Lieberman, a senator who also had voted to give Bush authority to use force in Iraq, said: "I don't know how John Kerry and John Edwards can say they supported the war but then opposed the funding for the troops who went to fight the war that the resolution that they supported authorized." Lieberman spoke at a candidate debate in Detroit Oct. 26, 2003.
Another Democratic rival who criticized Kerry for that vote was Rep. Dick Gephardt, who said beforehand that he would support the $87 billion "because it is the only responsible course of action. We must not send an ambiguous message to our troops, and we must not send an uncertain message to our friends and enemies in Iraq."
But aside from the $87 billion matter, this Bush ad is a textbook example of how to mislead voters through selective editing.
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 30, 2004 01:47:55 PM
LOL - Just a little copy-cat here.
Let's see. Going from voting FOR the war in Iraq to 'it's the wrong war, at the wrong time, etc. and the eight other reversals [flip-flops] in between....it's pretty clear to most sane, reasonable people that he defininately changed his postion. Nothing's going to change that fact.
posted on September 30, 2004 02:11:33 PM
linda, I know you're stubborn and virtually brain dead but how can you just keep saying Kerry is a flip-flopper and ignore, like a spoiled child , the FACT that bush has flip-flopped.
Intellectually you're about a -20 but give it an effort linda, try reading the truth and some day you may be able to do it without gagging.
OH! I bet you're happy....things in Iraq are going so well only 35 children were killed today!
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
posted on September 30, 2004 02:11:35 PM
Linda has no clue what really goes on in Congress. How stupid can you be to believe Kerry has flip flopped??? Oh, I forgot, we are talking about Linda. The last time I checked, these very things go on in Congress almost every day. A bill focused on education may have a rider that makes the bill bad, so it gets voted down. A similar bill that pops up days, or weeks, or months later may be identical regarding education, but may not have that bad rider. So, it gets passed. This is a typical way for one party to make it appear to be a partisan issue. Remember the attempts by the Republicans to get a vote on the gay marriage Constitutional Amendment? The Republicans knew they couldn't get it passed, but they still wanted a show of hands of Democrats so they could point fingers later down the road. Just because Kerry doesn't vote for a spending bill for the military and then later votes for a similar bill doesn't mean he flip flopped. Usually these benefit the majority party holding both Houses and are aimed at trying to put a spin on the other party. In this case, it is obvious that it was the Republicans who created this mess, and now they are using to portray Kerry in bad light. Keep in mind that the majority of Republican Senators also flip flopped, meaning they voted against Kerry on one and with Kerry on the other. I'm not saying this is only done by Republicans. It happens both ways, but obviously Linduh has chosen to be closed minded about it. Of course, leave it to a neonazicon to follow suit with it. I am sure Linduh knows the truth, she just wants to play dirty since she is a lemming and follows what her party and FOX tells her is so.
Linduh, if you want to continue to follow the lies, believe them, and then regurgitate them back to us, that is your perogative. You will have to answer to your higher being when the time comes. It will be tough to cover up your lies to protect your candidate though.
posted on September 30, 2004 02:29:43 PM
Rusty, I've already tried to explain how congress works to linduh. But linduh is incapable of original thought or learning. If it can't be C&P'd she can't handle it.
She hasn't had an original or new thought since 1950. Learning is impossible for her. She thinks if you just chant something over and over again it'll be true.
A good example is her inability to see that if flip-flopping is going on, bush is doing the exact same thing. There is proof but if she's brain dead there's no hope.
posted on September 30, 2004 02:32:51 PM
All the papers are saying kerry MUST clear up all his conflicting statements about the war in Iraq if he expects to do well in this debate tonight. They all admit he has made them....but it's expected that his supporters here are blinded while they are not.
And rusty - Will you ever reach adulthood where you can have a conversation without third-grade name calling? So far...guess not.
And I have no concern, problem nor worry about facing my 'maker'. What an odd statement/concern for you to have.
posted on September 30, 2004 02:48:54 PM
I would have expected such a lame attempt for a comeback. Linda, there simply isn't any other way to explain your intellect. You are nothing more than a lemming who regurgitates what you see and hear on the boob tube. We know that Congress supported Bush by voting to give him power to go to war. It was made painstakenly clear that Bush also asked for that power so that he could show the UN that it wasn't just his administration who was taking those inspections so seriously. When Congress gave Bush the power to go to war, it was to be used only as a last resort. I wouldn't say that the full cooperation by the Iraqi's with the UN weapons inspections searching for WMD's was that last resort. Hussein was cooperating with the inspectors. The inspectors found more than what the United States have. They found a handful of conventional warheads that flew 15 miles too far, and they ordered Iraq to destoy those missiles. Iraq complied, and all was good until the GW admin decided it was going to make them look bad, so they requested the UN inspectors to pull out, and ordered the attack on Iraq. Bush didn't use war as a last resort. Iraq posed no threat to the US and Bush and his advisors knew it. Al Qaeda wasn't in kahootz with Hussein. In fact, Bin Laden and Saddam didn't see eye to eye. Bin Laden saw Saddam as a sellout to Islam. Now, Bush is trying to use the Senate vote to support the President's presentation to the UN. Bush betrayed the Senate and the House. Kerry has said it, other Democrats have said it, Mc Cain has said it, and other Republicans have said it. Linda has decided to believe the talking heads on FOX and what Bush claims in his ads. Bush has attempted to abuse Kerry's voting records time and time again. Keep in mind that what may have been good for the economy in the early 90's, may not be good for the economy now. Voting for a good bill in the 90's that doesn't make good sense now. Conventional wisdom proves time and time again that things change. Remember blacks and women couldn't vote. That was the sign of the times, as wrong as they were, and it has changed. I also remember an amendment to pass prohibition, then oh my god!!!! They passed an amendment to ban prohibition. I guess our government flip flops all the time then.
[ edited by rustygumbo on Sep 30, 2004 02:50 PM ]
[ edited by rustygumbo on Sep 30, 2004 02:52 PM ]
posted on September 30, 2004 04:03:44 PM
I so thankful there are democrats that aren't so blind to see kerry's continued reversals - flip-flops....people who can read the reversals for themselves and not see a trouble man running for CIC of this Nation. I am thrilled that there are many democrats who have the ability to see kerry's lack of character for what it is...nothing. Nothing, even our Nation's safety on which he hasn't been able to make a steadfast decision on exactly what he would do/would have done since they decided to vote to go to war IF saddam didn't comply...which he didn't.
Ed Koch, who says he doesn't agree with President Bush on any domestic issue...can clearly see kerry's not qualified to be our CIC.
And I'm glad that there are many democrats like Ed Koch and Zel Miller who can see President Bush is more fit to lead our Nation.
Sep 1 2004, 04:31 PM
Why I Can't Vote for John Kerry Edward I. Koch
Wednesday, Sep. 1, 2004
In a weekly commentary in February 2002, I announced that I would support President Bush for re-election.
I wrote that I had recently had dinner with two diehard liberal Democrats and told them that if the election were held tomorrow, I would vote to re-elect President Bush. They nearly choked on their appetizers.
I explained that I was supporting the president because he had "made terrorism, which in my view is the greatest threat faced by this country, the number one issue in the world. He put together an unexpected grand coalition against Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, al-Qaida and the warlords of Afghanistan. Most important, he defied the generally held view of American media commentators that Afghanistan would become a quagmire, another Vietnam. Instead, victory was swift and with extraordinarily few American casualties."
Over the next two years, I reiterated my commitment to the president's re-election, and this week I endorsed the president at the Republican National Convention. Before introducing Mayor Michael Bloomberg to the assembled delegates, I said: "I know what you're thinking. What's Ed Koch doing at the Republican convention? Me. A Democratic district leader in Greenwich Village. Democratic city councilman. Democratic congressman, Democratic mayor.
Why am I here? To convert you. But that's for the next election. This year I'm voting for the re-election of President George W. Bush."
I cannot support John Kerry, the Democratic candidate, because he wavers too much on issues of fundamental importance:
For example, in explaining his vote in the U.S. Senate in favor of the war against Iraq, Kerry said, "He [Bush] misled every one of us."
After the Democratic convention, President Bush challenged Senator Kerry: "My opponent hasn't answered the question of whether, knowing what we know now, he would have supported going into Iraq." Kerry responded, "Yes, I would have voted for the authority."
Similarly, during his appearances with the other candidates at the first Democratic debate on May 3, 2004, Kerry strongly supported the president's actions in Iraq, stating, "George, I said at the time, I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam, and when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him."
But on June 18, 2003, the Associated Press reported: "Kerry said Wednesday that President Bush broke his promise to build an international coalition against Iraq's Saddam Hussein and then waged a war based on questionable intelligence. 'He misled every one of us,' Kerry said."
On September 2, 2003, Kerry claimed that he voted "to threaten" the use of force in Iraq. He said, "I voted to threaten the use of force to make Saddam Hussein comply with the resolutions of the United Nations." Then, on January 6, 2004, when asked by MSNBC "Hardball" host Chris Matthews, "Are you one of the anti-war candidates?" Kerry replied, "I am – yes, in the sense that I don't believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely."
Kerry more recently told the American public that in fact he would have voted for the war even if he had known at the time of his Senate vote that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. Kerry exhibited all the failures of a tortured soul, having to decide which was more important, winning the nomination or doing what was morally right. He chose the nomination.
Kerry's waffling is not limited to the war against Iraq. Kerry announced to the country that he opposed same-sex marriages and nevertheless would vote in the U.S. Senate against the constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage, his reason being that the Constitution should not be used to deny civil rights to people.
In 2002 he signed a letter opposing a similar amendment. The letter stated: "We believe it would be a grave error for Massachusetts to enshrine in our Constitution a provision which would have such a negative effect on so many of our fellow residents. ... We are therefore united in urging you to reject this Constitutional amendment and avoid stigmatizing so many of our fellow citizens who do not deserve to be treated in such a manner."
On the other hand, an article in the Boston Globe on February 6, 2004, reported: "Asked if he would support a state constitutional amendment barring gay and *beep* marriages, Kerry didn't rule out the possibility. 'I'll have to see what language there is,' he said."
Even worse, the Los Angeles Times reported on August 7, 2004, that while in Missouri, Kerry came out in favor of Missouri's recent amendment to its constitution that states "To be valid and recognized in this state, a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman."
According to the Times, a spokesman for the Human Rights Fund, a Washington group that lobbies for gay rights, said Kerry's support for the Missouri amendment (forbidding gay marriage) was not surprising. 'This is consistent with what he's been saying all along,' Steven Fisher, the group's communications director, said."
Again, a tortured soul, having to choose between principle and hopefully winning in the general election to come. He chose winning.
I respect those who have different opinions, but I have little regard for those who bend with the wind, those who vacillate, those who cave to the threats of others. I supported from the beginning the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. I continue to support our armed forces being there. I cannot admire a public official who straddles that issue.
I support the right to same-sex marriages. Gays and lesbians have every constitutional right to equal treatment before the law. I maintain my beliefs before every group. I simply cannot abide the panderer who takes both sides of an issue, thinking no one will notice.
Immediately following my speech at the Republican convention, I was asked by Wolf Blitzer of CNN what I thought of "the president's statement that the war on terrorism cannot be won." I was unfamiliar with any such statement, as I had not seen the interview with Matt Lauer of NBC-TV at which it was allegedly made. My mind raced, thinking Blitzer wants me to make some comment that he can use against Bush.
In World War II, one of the great poster statements was "Loose lips sink ships." That applied to inadvertently giving locations of ships to German submarines. But it applies in a different context to all candidates in an election who let down their guard in responding to smiling reporters lying in wait for gaffes.
I responded to Blitzer, "I've neither seen nor heard his comments and won't comment until I do." That was fortunate because his comments in context make sense.
The New York Sun reported today, "Interviewed on NBC's 'Today' show, Mr. Bush was asked, 'Do you really think we can win this war on terror in the next four years?' Mr. Bush replied, 'I have never said we can win it in four years.' NBC's Matt Lauer rephrased the question: 'So I'm just saying can we win it? Do you see that?' Mr. Bush said: '[/b]I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world[/b].'"
He is right. There will always be someone or some group willing to use terror as a weapon. As President Bush has indicated, the key is to "go after the terrorists and the countries that harbor them."
While an individual terrorist can always hide in a cave, he or she will have little or no impact on the world if no country is willing to provide weapons or sanctuary. It is a battle that will go on for an extended period of time. President Bush has always said so.
-------
Edward I. Koch is the former mayor of New York City. His commentary for Bloomberg radio is republished here. You can hear his weekly radio show by going to www.bloomberg.com/radio
----------
So see, there are dems who aren't voting for President Bush because of what some here call 'lies about kerry'...they make the same judgement about him from listening to KERRY HIMSELF.
posted on September 30, 2004 05:18:10 PM
Another lie Linduh. You should be ashamed of lying once again. No backbone at all. Hussein complied, the UN inspectors were there. They found nothing. They kept looking, they found nothing. The Bush Administration kept pushing, they found nothing. Hussein kept allowing the UN inspectors to search. They found nothing. So, we attack them because of those WMD's, and guess what??? We found nothing. OMG, Saddam was telling the truth!!! Holy Bat Crap, a brutal dictator telling the truth!
So Linduh, let's say, you were the CIC of the United States, and a foreign entity kept wanting to inspect our land and our country for things that really weren't there. How long would you let this go on? How long would you let another country bully America into inspections for something that wasn't there? I know I wouldn't let it go forever, yet Hussein kept proving time and time again he had no WMDs, to the point that Bush cracks jokes about it, and you are there to lap it up like a good little lemming. Let me tell you where your fearless leader is going to take you... Straight to the bowels of hell. Why? Because you lie. I might add, that you'll end up with GW and Clinton. I'm sure you're proud of that.
[ edited by rustygumbo on Sep 30, 2004 05:22 PM ]
"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
