(no subject)
"To put it simply, John Kerry won the 30 September debate with President Bush on style, but lost on substance. Kerry supporters are gushing about how "he looked so Presidential," as though posing for a White House photo op will strike fear into the hearts of terrorists around the globe. Maybe Kerry could audition for a spot ON The West Wing, but not IN it. Real life isn't a tv show; talking points don't keep the country safe. Despite the questions that were hopelessly biased against him, President Bush showed the same determination he has for nearly four years, although he was apparently annoyed when listening to Kerry's relentless negativity, vague assurances, fact-twisting, attacks on Bush's character and misrepresentations. If Bush seemed disgusted when Kerry lauded his own Vietnam war protest activities -- calling the war a hopeless quagmire being fought for illegal reasons and lies, the same as he is doing to Iraq today -- well, so was I.
Again and again, Kerry rephrased his new position that Iraq is "the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time," and "a diversion," even though he has agreed many times that Saddam was a danger, and that the world is better off without him in power. Taking casualties is "wrong." Using Afghanis to hunt terrorists in Afghanistan is "wrong." Bush disarming Saddam was "wrong." Not subjecting Americans to an international court is "wrong." Everything is "going wrong." Yet Kerry still insists that he can get more foreign countries to send troops there to take the place of American soldiers. Bush did make a good point there, asking, "So what's the message going to be: 'Please join us in Iraq. We're a grand diversion. Join us for a war that is the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time?'" Kerry had better be a lot more persuasive in French and German than he is in English, especially since France and Germany have said unequivocally that there is no chance of them doing so. "The French and German governments have made [it] clear that sending troops is out of the question," stated the LA Times in August 2004. This was more than a month ago, back when Kerry was certain that "he could substantially reduce the number of U.S. troops within the first six months of a Kerry administration." Kerry continues to insult and deride our true allies, the 46 countries that DID join us in Iraq, as "a trumped-up, so-called coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought and the extorted." Kerry claims that Bush could have gotten a "grand coalition" together if he'd been willing to "sit down with those leaders, say, 'What do you need, what do you need now, how much more will it take to get you to join us?'" Well, who's talking about putting together a "coalition of the bribed" now? When Kerry's not insulting them, he's trying to scare away our key allies, which would please the terrorists we're fighting no end. Kerry's own sister visit.
Kerry is proposing we do with Iran what Clinton did with North Korea.
This way, we can stop "wasting" money on the military and keep spending it on social programs.
According to Kerry, if elected:
- Jacques Chirac will trust us again, just like DeGaulle did Kennedy.
- I'll treat Kim Jong-Il like an equal.
- I'm against multilateral negotiations when Bush is for them.
Excuse me, again why is Jacques Chirac going to trust us again? What do you mean by trust... he's gonna send us a fruit basket with a card that says, "BFF forever!" the French have NEVER been PRO-WAR Entity, and never will, we can, how should a say, "trust" this theory.
And The democratic arguement is that the "flip-flopper" label is old.. Are you Kidding? Never, it was the biggest mistake of Kerry's entire campaign, but I don't have to state that do I? My only( ok, yeah right I have a million arguements against Kerry's campaign) question is WHY? did Kerry pull a 180. Was it because of pressure, or was it because that's what he truly believed in from the get-go. And if so, why didn't he have the honesty to say how he felt on issue? Was he afraid that it wouldn't win him the Democratic seat?
Well his wish-washy decisions sure as hell aren't going to assure him that Pres. Chriac will start sporting a "Kerry Makes America Cool!" button from now on.
I'm not done, but CSI is on.... I'll finish when I feel like it.
You can reply if you want to, but I'm not going to respond to it. BECAUSE I'm not gonna change anyone's opinion, you aren't going to change mine. second thought.... I'm not gonna allow postings because I don't want a lot of "Bush is stooopid" bull shit from some extreme or unclassy liberalist.
Again and again, Kerry rephrased his new position that Iraq is "the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time," and "a diversion," even though he has agreed many times that Saddam was a danger, and that the world is better off without him in power. Taking casualties is "wrong." Using Afghanis to hunt terrorists in Afghanistan is "wrong." Bush disarming Saddam was "wrong." Not subjecting Americans to an international court is "wrong." Everything is "going wrong." Yet Kerry still insists that he can get more foreign countries to send troops there to take the place of American soldiers. Bush did make a good point there, asking, "So what's the message going to be: 'Please join us in Iraq. We're a grand diversion. Join us for a war that is the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time?'" Kerry had better be a lot more persuasive in French and German than he is in English, especially since France and Germany have said unequivocally that there is no chance of them doing so. "The French and German governments have made [it] clear that sending troops is out of the question," stated the LA Times in August 2004. This was more than a month ago, back when Kerry was certain that "he could substantially reduce the number of U.S. troops within the first six months of a Kerry administration." Kerry continues to insult and deride our true allies, the 46 countries that DID join us in Iraq, as "a trumped-up, so-called coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought and the extorted." Kerry claims that Bush could have gotten a "grand coalition" together if he'd been willing to "sit down with those leaders, say, 'What do you need, what do you need now, how much more will it take to get you to join us?'" Well, who's talking about putting together a "coalition of the bribed" now? When Kerry's not insulting them, he's trying to scare away our key allies, which would please the terrorists we're fighting no end. Kerry's own sister visit.
Kerry is proposing we do with Iran what Clinton did with North Korea.
This way, we can stop "wasting" money on the military and keep spending it on social programs.
According to Kerry, if elected:
- Jacques Chirac will trust us again, just like DeGaulle did Kennedy.
- I'll treat Kim Jong-Il like an equal.
- I'm against multilateral negotiations when Bush is for them.
Excuse me, again why is Jacques Chirac going to trust us again? What do you mean by trust... he's gonna send us a fruit basket with a card that says, "BFF forever!" the French have NEVER been PRO-WAR Entity, and never will, we can, how should a say, "trust" this theory.
And The democratic arguement is that the "flip-flopper" label is old.. Are you Kidding? Never, it was the biggest mistake of Kerry's entire campaign, but I don't have to state that do I? My only( ok, yeah right I have a million arguements against Kerry's campaign) question is WHY? did Kerry pull a 180. Was it because of pressure, or was it because that's what he truly believed in from the get-go. And if so, why didn't he have the honesty to say how he felt on issue? Was he afraid that it wouldn't win him the Democratic seat?
Well his wish-washy decisions sure as hell aren't going to assure him that Pres. Chriac will start sporting a "Kerry Makes America Cool!" button from now on.
I'm not done, but CSI is on.... I'll finish when I feel like it.
You can reply if you want to, but I'm not going to respond to it. BECAUSE I'm not gonna change anyone's opinion, you aren't going to change mine. second thought.... I'm not gonna allow postings because I don't want a lot of "Bush is stooopid" bull shit from some extreme or unclassy liberalist.