TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Weather Vane Kerry
Pages (2): « 1 [2]


Posted by Fir3start3r on Oct-02-2004 23:15:

Here's an example after doing a Google of some right-wing blogs...
It's rather lengthy though...and thoroughly explains what I'm talking about...
Just remember this aren't my opinions here before flying off the handle; they're just an example to support the arguement of the thread...

[img]
http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/Ker...mages/siers.jpg
[/img]

quote:

Flip

"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 12/20/03

Flop

"...(T)he satisfaction we take in (Saddam's) downfall does not hide this fact: We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure." -- John Kerry, 9/20/04

Reality Check

"Well, what can we say of Senator Kerry? He was for the war and then he was against the war. He was for it, but he wouldn't fund it. Then he'd fund it, but he wasn't for it. He was for the Patriot Act until he was against the Patriot Act. Or was he against it until he was for it? I forget. He probably does, too. This is a candidate who has to Google his own name to find out where he stands." -- George Pataki


Flip

"But I don't think anyone in the Congress is going to not give our troops ammunition, not give our troops the ability to be able to defend themselves. We're not going to cut and run and not do the job." -- John Kerry on the $87 billion dollars spent to rebuild Iraq and support our troops in Iraq, 9/14/03


Flop

"I'm proud to say that John (Edwards) joined me in voting against that $87 billion..." -- John Kerry, 7/12/04

"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." -- John Kerry, 3/19/04


Reality Check

"My point about John Kerry being inconsistent is best described in his own words, not mine. I quote John Kerry, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." Maybe this explains John Edwards' need for two Americas. One is where John Kerry can vote for something and another where he can vote against exactly the same thing." -- Rudy Giuliani


Flip

"Iraq may not be the war on terror itself, but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror, and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that and I disagree with the Governor [Howard Dean]." -- John Kerry, 12/15/03


Flop

"...(W)e must have a great honest national debate on Iraq. The President claims it is the centerpiece of his war on terror. In fact, Iraq was a profound diversion from that war and the battle against our greatest enemy, Osama bin Laden and the terrorists." -- John Kerry 9/20/04


Reality Check

"I was just back in my office banging my head on the jukebox. This is my candidate, and...I don't know what he's talking about." -- Don Imus, 9/16/04, after an interview with John Kerry that extensively covered his "position" on the war


Flip

"If you don't believe ... Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." -- John Kerry, USA Today on 2/13/03


Flop

"If you think I would have gone to war the way George Bush did, don't vote for me." -- John Kerry, Jan 2004


Reality Check

"When it was popular to be a Massachusetts liberal, his voting record was that. When it was popular to be for the Iraq war, he was for it. Now it's popular to be against it, and he's against it." -- Jay Carson, a Dean campaign spokesman


Flip

"I would disagree with John McCain that it�s the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it�s what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that - that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It�s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." -- John Kerry, "Face The Nation", 9/15/02

"It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that, left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world....He has supported and harbored terrorist groups, particularly radical Palestinian groups such as Abu Nidal, and he has given money to families of suicide murderers in Israel. ...We should not go to war because these things are in his past, but we should be prepared to go to war because of what they tell us about the future." -- John Kerry 10/9/02


Flop

"Yet today, President Bush tells us that he would do everything all over again, the same way. How can he possibly be serious? Is he really saying that if we knew there were no imminent threat, no weapons of mass destruction, no ties to Al Qaeda, the United States should have invaded Iraq? My answer is no - because a Commander-in-Chief's first responsibility is to make a wise and responsible decision to keep America safe." -- John Kerry, 9/20/04


Reality Check

"Even in this post-9/11 period, Senator Kerry doesn�t appear to understand how the world has changed. He talks about leading a "more sensitive war on terror," as though al-Qaida will be impressed with our softer side. He declared at the Democratic Convention that he will forcefully defend America after we have been attacked. My fellow Americans, we have already been attacked, and faced with an enemy who seeks the deadliest of weapons to use against us, we cannot wait for the next attack. We must do everything we can to prevent it and that includes the use of military force." -- Dick Cheney


Flip

"I agree completely with this Administration�s goal of a regime change in Iraq - Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991." -- John Kerry, 7/29/02


Flop

"It's the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time." -- John Kerry, 9/06/04


Reality Check

"Senator Kerry says, "America should go to war not when it wants to go to war but when it has to go to war." Well, Senator, the firefighters and cops who ran into those burning towers and died on September 11th didn't want to go to war. They were heroes in a war they didn't even know existed. America did not choose this war. But we have a president who chooses to win it." -- George Pataki


Flip

"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." -- John Kerry, Democratic Debate, 5/3/03


Flop

"Are you one of the anti-war candidates?" -- MSNBC�S Chris Matthews, 1/6/04

"I am, yes, in the sense that I don't believe the president took to us war as he should have, yes. Absolutely. Do I think this president violated his promises to America? Yes, I do, Chris. Was there a way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable? You bet there was and we should have done it right." -- John Kerry, 1/6/04


Reality Check

"(John Kerry) even, at one point, declared himself as an anti-war candidate. And now he says he's pro-war candidate. At this rate, with 64 days left, he still has time to change his position four or five more times." -- Rudy Giuliani


Flip

"I think the judgment of a nominee who doesn't understand that having Saddam Hussein captured will make it extraordinarily difficult to be able to beat an incumbent wartime president who captured Saddam Hussein. And let me tell you why, Tim. Saddam Hussein took us to war once before. In that war, young Americans were killed. He went to war in order to take over the oil fields. It wasn't just an invasion of Kuwait. He was heading for the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. And that would have had a profound effect on the security of the United States. This is a man who has used weapons of mass destruction, unlike other people on this Earth today, not only against other people but against his own people. This is a man who tried to assassinate a former president of the United States, a man who lobbed 36 missiles into Israel in order to destabilize the Middle East, a man who is so capable of miscalculation that he even brought this war on himself. This is a man who, if he was left uncaptured, would have continued to be able to organize the Ba'athists. He would have continued to terrorize the people, just in their minds, because of 30 years of terror in Iraq." -- John Kerry on NBC's "Meet The Press, 1/11/04


Flop

"The only legitimate reason (to go to war was) the weapons of mass destruction question. But after you built the international coalition, exhausted the [U.N.] inspections and you have no other choice." -- John Kerry, 9/07/04


Reality Check

"The years of keeping Saddam in a box were coming to a close. The international consensus that he be kept isolated and unarmed had eroded to the point that many critics of military action had decided the time had come again to do business with Saddam, despite his near daily attacks on our pilots, and his refusal, until his last day in power, to allow the unrestricted inspection of his arsenal. Our choice wasn't between a benign status quo and the bloodshed of war. It was between war and a graver threat. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Not our critics abroad. Not our political opponents. And certainly not a disingenuous film maker who would have us believe that Saddam's Iraq was an oasis of peace when in fact it was a place of indescribable cruelty, torture chambers, mass graves and prisons that destroyed the lives of the small children held inside their walls." -- John McCain


Conclusion

The war on terrorism is serious business, not some petty political game. While the war is in progress, the lives of our troops, 27 million Iraqis, and countless Americans here at home depend on the decisions made by our Commander-In-Chief.

Given that, do we really want a President who'll radically alter his position on something as important as the war in Iraq based on nothing more than which way the prevailing political winds are blowing? Literally millions of lives, American and Iraqi, may be saved or lost by decisions that are going to be made over the next four years in the White House. So think hard about this, do you really think someone as feckless as John Kerry can be trusted with that sort of responsibility? Obviously, the answer is no...


Posted by 3xx3r7 on Oct-03-2004 00:12:

I like the conclusion of the quote. They imply that Bush can be trusted (since he is the only other candidate). LMAO


Posted by Fir3start3r on Oct-03-2004 00:19:

quote:
Originally posted by 3xx3r7
I like the conclusion of the quote. They imply that Bush can be trusted (since he is the only other candidate). LMAO


It's funny cause it's true.
The irony is that the Democrats party line is pretty much, "At least we're not Bush!"

In any event, the next debate should be interesting since the last one was pretty much a stale-mate.

Maybe Kerry will actually have some answers instead of should have, could have, would have...


Posted by Rodrico on Oct-05-2004 05:45:

quote:
Originally posted by policerobots
WHOA!!

An anti-kerry post from someone in CANADA!

*Phew* gimmie a few mins to catch my breath here


There are some of us that hate both Kerry and Bush.


Posted by MisterOpus1 on Oct-05-2004 16:13:

quote:
Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Here's an example after doing a Google of some right-wing blogs...
It's rather lengthy though...and thoroughly explains what I'm talking about...


I'm just curious - do you only read the conservative blogs? Do you, by chance, read any non-bias sources? Hey, I'll grant you that I love readin' my lefty blogs every mornin', but it would be fallacious to rely on them for every source of info.

Just a small curiousity of mine. Anyways.....

quote:
Just remember this aren't my opinions here before flying off the handle; they're just an example to support the arguement of the thread...


Fair enough, though I am personally a little more curious about your own particular opinions on the matter, rather than these that were posted from someone else. But let's take a look at these:

***cracks knuckles***

quote:
Flip

"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 12/20/03

Flop

"...(T)he satisfaction we take in (Saddam's) downfall does not hide this fact: We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure." -- John Kerry, 9/20/04

Reality Check

"Well, what can we say of Senator Kerry? He was for the war and then he was against the war. He was for it, but he wouldn't fund it. Then he'd fund it, but he wasn't for it. He was for the Patriot Act until he was against the Patriot Act. Or was he against it until he was for it? I forget. He probably does, too. This is a candidate who has to Google his own name to find out where he stands." -- George Pataki


It's funny - I know it's difficult for many conservatives like Bush to hold more than one thought at the same time, but what really impresses me is Pataki being able to not just hold multiple thoughts, but being able to deliberately intermingle those thoughts all together! That's impressive. Let's examine:

The "Flip" statement is John Kerry stating that the world is, indeed, better off without Saddam in power. NO ONE denies this, even the most crazy tree-huggin' ultra leftists. That was never the issue - what WAS the issue was HOW Bush went to war with Iraq - blatantly saying "fuck off" to anyone who disagreed with him, completely ignoring all evidence that clearly demonstrated Saddam's lack of nuclear and WMD capabilities (read Sunday's NYTimes piece), and hurriedly kicking out UN weapons inspectors for, well, I still don't fucking know why? Neither does anyone else really. Oh, and more to the point, the "Flop" part is Kerry stating the ineptitude of this Administration completely showing all disregard to a viable post-war plan, as well as brushing off anyone who disagreed with their idealism (like that General who stated several hundred thousand troops were needed - the Pentagon quickly showed him the door).

It's painfully obvious how piss-poor this Administration's post-war performance has gone thus far, and I find it quite sad that it's likely we'll see an "October surprise" being that of our offensive in Iraq to gain back those cities that have been overrun by insurgents up to the present. Amazing how politics plays a role in wars. Amazing how many soldiers lives have been lost just so we can play these cute little "war games" right before the election. (Admittedly, this is my own speculation on the "October surprise", but I'm willing to bet you a keg of beer from my favorite brewery that this is the case).

As for Pataki's bullshit spin, Occ did a splendid breakdown of that fact, which you can read at your leisure here:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...in&pagenumber=4

As for the Patriot Act, thanks again goes to Occ, which I'll post his answer here:

quote:
Kerry has made it demonstrably clear numerous times, that he has not taken issue with the Patriot Act itself, but he way in which it has been INTERPRETED by Ashcroft:

quote:
But in reality Kerry is not so far from Bush in his views on the Patriot Act. The Massachusetts senator claims he not only stands by his vote for the legislation, but that he authored most of the law�s money-laundering provisions and thinks some aspects of the act actually need strengthening (like improving intelligence information sharing). However, the two do differ on which provisions should be renewed, and which revised.

Bush has strongly and publicly urged lawmakers to renew all the provisions of the Patriot Act set to expire next year. Kerry, meanwhile, has said he wants to scale back some sections he deems as being too invasive. Kerry has raised concerns in particular about how enhanced police powers granted under the Patriot Act�like the increased ease in obtaining wiretaps, search warrants and access to personal information, for example�have been interpreted under Attorney General John Ashcroft. Kerry accuses Ashcroft of using those expanded police powers �in secret ways and for political purposes� by authorizing his agents to monitor church meetings and political rallies, for example, �without any cause and without the need to get approval.�
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4839040/site/newsweek/


Moving on,

quote:
Flip

"But I don't think anyone in the Congress is going to not give our troops ammunition, not give our troops the ability to be able to defend themselves. We're not going to cut and run and not do the job." -- John Kerry on the $87 billion dollars spent to rebuild Iraq and support our troops in Iraq, 9/14/03


Flop

"I'm proud to say that John (Edwards) joined me in voting against that $87 billion..." -- John Kerry, 7/12/04

"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." -- John Kerry, 3/19/04


Reality Check

"My point about John Kerry being inconsistent is best described in his own words, not mine. I quote John Kerry, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." Maybe this explains John Edwards' need for two Americas. One is where John Kerry can vote for something and another where he can vote against exactly the same thing." -- Rudy Giuliani


Check out Occ's post on the $87 billion quote. Personally I find it much more disgusting how our President was willing to veto the 1st bill because it didn't suit his financial economic standards. And this is the same douchebag who states that "there's nothing complicated about supporting our troops"!!!!!

Next.

quote:
Flip

"Iraq may not be the war on terror itself, but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror, and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that and I disagree with the Governor [Howard Dean]." -- John Kerry, 12/15/03


Flop

"...(W)e must have a great honest national debate on Iraq. The President claims it is the centerpiece of his war on terror. In fact, Iraq was a profound diversion from that war and the battle against our greatest enemy, Osama bin Laden and the terrorists." -- John Kerry 9/20/04


Reality Check

"I was just back in my office banging my head on the jukebox. This is my candidate, and...I don't know what he's talking about." -- Don Imus, 9/16/04, after an interview with John Kerry that extensively covered his "position" on the war


I'm just wondering at this point - do you really not understand what Kerry is saying here, or are you just so adamantly opposed to the Democratic ticket that you'll just accept these conservative talking points at face value? He really is making sense here, and I think most partially intelligent individuals (yes, even conservatives) know exactly what Kerry is referring to here. I really feel that it's pretty damn obvious, but yet I'm obligated to break it down to explain further.

Look, I admit I do this at times with the lefty talkin' points. But there are times when it bites me in the ass, and there are those here that do a terrific job pointing those faulty points out to me. I'm going to do that with you now. Take a look at Kerry's first statement:

quote:
Iraq may not be the war on terror itself


Translation: it had nothing to do with the war on terror. If you have problems with that, there's a myriad of intelligence papers and articles that explain this. Heck, one was even out today:

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/9836140.htm

His next statement:

quote:
but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror, and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that and I disagree with the Governor


Translation: The fucking mess we're in now has a direct impact on the war on terror - because NOW we have terrorists, including Al Qaeda pouring in and we must not allow Iraq to fall into their hands. Regardless of the fallacious means of HOW we got there, we've got a fucking mess now with both local and foreign insurgents and terrorists, and we've gotta fight and win the battle NOW.

I like Imus, but there are times that I find even he plays up to the political headlines and talking points on both sides. He cuts through the crap most of the time, though. The quote cited above, however, was not directly related to the "flip flop" quotes you cited.

Shame on you.


quote:
Flip

"If you don't believe ... Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." -- John Kerry, USA Today on 2/13/03


Flop

"If you think I would have gone to war the way George Bush did, don't vote for me." -- John Kerry, Jan 2004


Reality Check

"When it was popular to be a Massachusetts liberal, his voting record was that. When it was popular to be for the Iraq war, he was for it. Now it's popular to be against it, and he's against it." -- Jay Carson, a Dean campaign spokesman


Again, I'm not sure how the "flip" quote relates to the "flop" quote. The "flip" quote is Kerry stating that he believed Saddam had nukes and/or nuke capability. Of course, this was before the IAEA came out with the statement that the Niger papers were forgeries, and we must also consider that much of the intelligence passed down to the Congress at that time was extremely watered down and embellished to prop-up the case for Bush's war. There was no counter-intelligence given to Kerry regarding the fallacious claims of the aluminum tubes, for example. In fact, Senator Graham from Florida demanded that the Bush Administration give all documentation to our Congress and Senate, only to find such a demand in vain.

I'm digressing a bit, so let's get back to point and examine the second quote - "If you think I would have gone to war the way George Bush did, don't vote for me."

Read it again:

"If you think I would have gone to war the way George Bush did, don't vote for me."

Now, how does advocating an authorization for war based on faulty and distorted intelligence (by that I mean that some counterintelligence was withheld) equate to contradicting oneself by stating HOW our leader and neoconservatives went to war (i.e. hurriedly kicking out weapons inspectors for doing their jobs, and with no realistic post-war plan at all)?!?

IOW, he's not saying he was against the authorization for war - HE WAS AGAINST HOW BUSH CONDUCTED THE WAR. Funny, that seems to correlate exactly with what Kerry said during the debate!


quote:
Flip

"I would disagree with John McCain that it�s the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it�s what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that - that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It�s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." -- John Kerry, "Face The Nation", 9/15/02

"It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that, left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world....He has supported and harbored terrorist groups, particularly radical Palestinian groups such as Abu Nidal, and he has given money to families of suicide murderers in Israel. ...We should not go to war because these things are in his past, but we should be prepared to go to war because of what they tell us about the future." -- John Kerry 10/9/02


Flop

"Yet today, President Bush tells us that he would do everything all over again, the same way. How can he possibly be serious? Is he really saying that if we knew there were no imminent threat, no weapons of mass destruction, no ties to Al Qaeda, the United States should have invaded Iraq? My answer is no - because a Commander-in-Chief's first responsibility is to make a wise and responsible decision to keep America safe." -- John Kerry, 9/20/04


Reality Check

"Even in this post-9/11 period, Senator Kerry doesn�t appear to understand how the world has changed. He talks about leading a "more sensitive war on terror," as though al-Qaida will be impressed with our softer side. He declared at the Democratic Convention that he will forcefully defend America after we have been attacked. My fellow Americans, we have already been attacked, and faced with an enemy who seeks the deadliest of weapons to use against us, we cannot wait for the next attack. We must do everything we can to prevent it and that includes the use of military force." -- Dick Cheney


I have to concur with Occ - these type of quotes make me giggle a little bit too. The "flip" quotes demonstrated how Kerry, along with most Congressmen and Senators, relied on the faulty intelligence that Saddam had WMD. Keep in mind that Clinton too believed this intelligence, and he was making it more obvious that he too would have eventually gone after Saddam based on this bad intelligence. So what does that have to do with what we know today? Let's look at the "flop":

quote:
Is he really saying that if we knew there were no imminent threat, no weapons of mass destruction, no ties to Al Qaeda, the United States should have invaded Iraq?


Again, this quote does not relate to the first quote on Kerry basing his decision on faulty data, but let's go with it for a moment. IF the president KNEW ahead of time (and that's an argument all for itself and for another thread) that there were no ties to Al Qaeda (you know, the ******s that actually attacked us), and there were no WMD (including nukes, which according to the NYTimes Sunday article, that was the case), what political logic could truly be invoked to attack Saddam?

Umm, he was a "bad guy"? He was an "evil doer"?

SO FUCKING WHAT?!? Since when did we assume the role of global cops? And even if we did assume that role, shouldn't we have fucking taken care of the ******s WHO ATTACKED US, rather than pull our troops out of that hunt to attack a country that has no ties to them AND HAS NOT ATTACKED US?!?

And if we did assume that role, shouldn't we be going after countries that we KNOW have WMD capability or are working on that capability (uhh, like N. Korea or Iran)?

And Dick needs to keep his distorting fucking piehole shut when he comes out with bullshit rhetoric like the quote above. Kerry was simply using both Bush, Rummy, AND Cheney's rhetoric when it comes to a "sensitive war":

quote:
Responding to a question regarding the scrutiny to which certain minorities have been subject since the September 11 terror attacks and the need to ensure that innocent people are not unfairly targeted, Bush mentioned the necessary "balance between running down intelligence and bringing people to justice," and said, "we need to be very sensitive on that."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...20040806-1.html


quote:
BUSH: "Precisely because America is powerful, we must be sensitive about expressing our power and influence"
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...3/20010305.html


quote:
CHENEY: "We recognize that the presence of U.S. forces can in some cases present a burden on the local community. We're not insensitive to that"
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...4/20040413.html


quote:
DEFENSE SECRETARY DONALD RUMSFELD: "We have to be sensitive (to the threat of terrorist attacks outside of Iraq). To the point the world thinks the United States is focused on the problems in Iraq, it is conceivable that someone could make a mistake and believe that that is an opportunity for them to make-- to take an action which they otherwise would have avoided, and we have to see that we are arranged, and it is clear to the world that that is-it will not be an opportune time"
http://commdocs.house.gov/committee...as036100_0f.htm


"In conducting the first war in Iraq, then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney repeatedly stressed the need for America to fight a 'sensitive' war"
(can't find the link, sorry).

What's left? Oh -

quote:
Flip

"I agree completely with this Administration�s goal of a regime change in Iraq - Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991." -- John Kerry, 7/29/02


Flop

"It's the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time." -- John Kerry, 9/06/04


Reality Check

"Senator Kerry says, "America should go to war not when it wants to go to war but when it has to go to war." Well, Senator, the firefighters and cops who ran into those burning towers and died on September 11th didn't want to go to war. They were heroes in a war they didn't even know existed. America did not choose this war. But we have a president who chooses to win it." -- George Pataki


The same talking point expressed in different words. You conservatives are good at that! This was clearly demonstrated last Thursday by Bush. Jesus, I think he only had maybe 2-3 true points, and he simply reworded them over and over. Actually, it's sad because some of his points he didn't even bother to reword at all - he just used repetition over and over.

A pattern is clearly seen in your arguments.

To recap - this was Kerry's statement made prior to the war with the distorted and partially withheld intelligence given to him at that time. He still supported regime change today, mind you, but he's made it abundantly clear that his support of regime change WOULD NOT HAVE SUPERCEDED his offensive on Al Qaeda and the war on terror. But what's more, once again he is not opposing his own vote for authority given to Bush to go to war, He opposes HOW Bush went to war and a severly lacking post-war plan.

And why was Pataki talking about 9/11 when the "flip-flop" quotes were about Saddam and Iraq? Isn't it funny how Bush also seemed eager to equivocate this point on Thursday as well?


quote:
Flip

"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." -- John Kerry, Democratic Debate, 5/3/03


Flop

"Are you one of the anti-war candidates?" -- MSNBC�S Chris Matthews, 1/6/04

"I am, yes, in the sense that I don't believe the president took to us war as he should have, yes. Absolutely. Do I think this president violated his promises to America? Yes, I do, Chris. Was there a way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable? You bet there was and we should have done it right." -- John Kerry, 1/6/04


Reality Check

"(John Kerry) even, at one point, declared himself as an anti-war candidate. And now he says he's pro-war candidate. At this rate, with 64 days left, he still has time to change his position four or five more times." -- Rudy Giuliani


Good God, the same fucking point yet again? Just read above.


quote:
Flip

"I think the judgment of a nominee who doesn't understand that having Saddam Hussein captured will make it extraordinarily difficult to be able to beat an incumbent wartime president who captured Saddam Hussein. And let me tell you why, Tim. Saddam Hussein took us to war once before. In that war, young Americans were killed. He went to war in order to take over the oil fields. It wasn't just an invasion of Kuwait. He was heading for the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. And that would have had a profound effect on the security of the United States. This is a man who has used weapons of mass destruction, unlike other people on this Earth today, not only against other people but against his own people. This is a man who tried to assassinate a former president of the United States, a man who lobbed 36 missiles into Israel in order to destabilize the Middle East, a man who is so capable of miscalculation that he even brought this war on himself. This is a man who, if he was left uncaptured, would have continued to be able to organize the Ba'athists. He would have continued to terrorize the people, just in their minds, because of 30 years of terror in Iraq." -- John Kerry on NBC's "Meet The Press, 1/11/04


Flop

"The only legitimate reason (to go to war was) the weapons of mass destruction question. But after you built the international coalition, exhausted the [U.N.] inspections and you have no other choice." -- John Kerry, 9/07/04


Reality Check

"The years of keeping Saddam in a box were coming to a close. The international consensus that he be kept isolated and unarmed had eroded to the point that many critics of military action had decided the time had come again to do business with Saddam, despite his near daily attacks on our pilots, and his refusal, until his last day in power, to allow the unrestricted inspection of his arsenal. Our choice wasn't between a benign status quo and the bloodshed of war. It was between war and a graver threat. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Not our critics abroad. Not our political opponents. And certainly not a disingenuous film maker who would have us believe that Saddam's Iraq was an oasis of peace when in fact it was a place of indescribable cruelty, torture chambers, mass graves and prisons that destroyed the lives of the small children held inside their walls." -- John McCain


I really hope you are finally seeing a pattern here. The same point, yet again. How difficult is it for anyone to understand that Kerry supported regime change (though he didn�t support it superceded the necessity to hunt down Al Qaeda), but he didn�t support HOW Bush conducted the war/post-war?

I know you conservatives understand this. Jesus, this is not that difficult to understand. I guess the question really is, why do the conservatives continue to distort such the obvious? Are you afraid that perhaps this point is pretty easy for most citizens to understand?


quote:
Conclusion

The war on terrorism is serious business, not some petty political game. While the war is in progress, the lives of our troops, 27 million Iraqis, and countless Americans here at home depend on the decisions made by our Commander-In-Chief.

Given that, do we really want a President who'll radically alter his position on something as important as the war in Iraq based on nothing more than which way the prevailing political winds are blowing? Literally millions of lives, American and Iraqi, may be saved or lost by decisions that are going to be made over the next four years in the White House. So think hard about this, do you really think someone as feckless as John Kerry can be trusted with that sort of responsibility? Obviously, the answer is no...


Counter-conclusion: This was a pretty easy piece of drivel to debunk. Granted, there are a handful of �flip-flops� against Kerry. This certainly wasn�t one of them. BTW, have you checked out Occ�s list of Bush�s flip-flops?:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...12&pagenumber=1

Ya know, for some reason, Bush�s flip-flop list was just slightly more impressive to me�..


Posted by occrider on Oct-05-2004 17:08:

I was going to respond, but I've given up replying to hit and run posters


Posted by MisterOpus1 on Oct-05-2004 17:10:

quote:
Originally posted by occrider
I was going to respond, but I've given up replying to hit and run posters


Sound advice. Wish I'd learn quicker.


Posted by smokeape on Oct-06-2004 00:05:

Re: Weather Vane Kerry

quote:
Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Kerry quotes...

Personally this fuckin' scares the hell out of me.
Who the hell wants a wishy-washy president??

-- "I'll never give a veto to any country over our security. But . . ."

-- "I believe in being strong and resolute and determined. And I will hunt down and kill the terrorists, wherever they are. But . . ."

-- "We have to be steadfast and resolved, and I am. And I will succeed for those troops, now that we're there. We have to succeed. We can't leave a failed Iraq. But . . ."

-- "I believe that we have to win this. The president and I have always agreed on that. And from the beginning, I did vote to give the authority, because I thought Saddam Hussein was a threat, and I did accept that intelligence. But . . ."

-- "I have nothing but respect for the British, Tony Blair, and for what they've been willing to do. But . . ."

-- "What I want to do is change the dynamics on the ground. And you have to do that by beginning to not back off of the Fallujahs and other places, and send the wrong message to the terrorists. You have to close the borders. You've got to show you're serious in that regard. But . . ."

-- "I couldn't agree more that the Iraqis want to be free and that they could be free. But . . ."

-- "No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to pre-empt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But . . ."

-- "I've never wavered in my life. I know exactly what we need to do in Iraq, and my position has been consistent: Saddam Hussein is a threat. He needed to be disarmed. We needed to go to the U.N. The president needed the authority to use force in order to be able to get him to do something, because he never did it without the threat of force. But . . ."



Great ones! LIke I wanna be president, but don't wanna make presidential decisions. We need a noodle like that in office like a hole in the head!

Lol!
[[[smoke]]]


Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.