Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on August 10, 2004, 09:40:09 AM
-
GRAND CANYON, Ariz. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said on Monday he would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing force against Iraq even if he had known then no weapons of mass destruction would be found.
link to Rueters via myway (http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/381249|top|08-09-2004::17:46|reuters.html)
-
well i respect him saying that a great deal. moveon.org staffers must be out buying razorblades in bulk however.
-
Meet the new boss.....
Same as the old boss
Won't get fooled again.......
(visualise wicked air guitar. Better than GWB aka Will Ferrel in that hilarious but oh so dead on the money! video Ripsnort just posted about)
This just proves that Bush sucks but so does Kerry. IMO Bush by a magnitude of five more than Kerry but they both suck. Which is why I'll be writing in "MCain" more than likely.
-
I've never been folled?
What does it feel like?
-
Originally posted by wklink
I've never been folled?
What does it feel like?
Thats when you're rolled over and fondled...Folled.
-
Are we on the flip part or the flop part of the Kerry cycle?
Anyhow, NOTE TO KERRY TROOPS URGENT NOTICE!
As of today, August 10, 2004 the Iraq war was offically a good thing. This is what you will think untill we tell you otherwise.
-
Which is why I'll be writing in "MCain" more than likely.
====
McCain sucks just the same
-
so full of holes and doublespeak I am surprised it is even printed...
""My goal, my diplomacy, my statesmanship is to get our troops reduced in number and I believe if you do the statesmanship properly, I believe if you do the kind of alliance building that is available to us, that it's appropriate to have a goal of reducing the troops over that period of time," he said.
On that timetable, Kerry's aim would be to pull out a large number of the 138,000 U.S. troops in Iraq in the first six months of his administration.
"Obviously, we'd have to see how events unfold," he added. "I intend to get more people involved in that effort and I'm convinced I can be more successful than President Bush in succeeding in doing that. It is an appropriate goal to have and I'm going to try to achieve it.""
herman truly think that just because he becomes president, the euros would throw their soldiers into Iraq to fill the holes he created when he pulls out ours? LOL
Or is he under the illusion the fighting will magically stop in Iraq once he becomes POTUS?? LOL
Euros - you ready send your soldiers to Iraq just because the Potus is skerry and not Bush??
LOL - this guy needs to go into stand up comedy ...
-
This guy is unbelieveable.
-
Hes in a bad spot. The economic, miltitary and political damage that Bush has done will not be undone in the next presidential term. It will take a decade at least and much longer then that to pay off the deficits that Bush ran.
But no matter the answer is not to abandon the boys and girls that are serving Bush in Iraq. Kerry has to keep appearences that the war has total executive support, its the only way to leave with dignity and to minimize the dangers faced there. If Kerry babbles how much he is against the war and that they will be coming home the day he wins it will cause a ground swell in the iraqi resistance and cost many american lives and make it harder to get out. Bush didnt need an exit strategy cause he never planed on leaving. Kerry is not so lucky.
If he had said he was pulling the troops out ASAP of course you types would be all over him saying that no matter how he felt about the war he owed it the troops to do exaclty what he has in fact done.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Hes in a bad spot. The economic, miltitary and political damage that Bush has done will not be undone in the next presidential term. It will take a decade at least and much longer then that to pay off the deficits that Bush ran.
But no matter the answer is not to abandon the boys and girls that are serving Bush in Iraq. Kerry has to keep appearences that the war has total executive support, its the only way to leave with dignity and to minimize the dangers faced there. If Kerry babbles how much he is against the war and that they will be coming home the day he wins it will cause a ground swell in the iraqi resistance and cost many american lives and make it harder to get out. Bush didnt need an exit strategy cause he never planed on leaving. Kerry is not so lucky.
If he had said he was pulling the troops out ASAP of course you types would be all over him saying that no matter how he felt about the war he owed it the troops to do exaclty what he has in fact done.
So basically you are saying that you agree with anything kerry says...
-
No. But but you must admit that his hands are tied about support for Iraq. He is a centrist no matter how you see him and he will have to deal with Iraq if hes elected. Probably for the whole 4 years at least. So stating now that he is going to pull them out would just cripple his abiltiy to deal with the situation if and when he is in charge.
Its the trap that Bush set for congress.
Vote against the war. Un patriotic or cowardly
Opps the evidence was bogus...but you must support the troops in time of war!
Re election time..well you supported the war too!
New president. denied the luxuy of doing anything but an orderly withdrawl.
I could just say to you that basically you just disagree with anything Kerry does..but I will answer your question. Although you didnt take the time to really think about my post.
-
Pongo Kerry is not a centrist, his 20 year record as one of the most left wing people in the senate is enought evidence of that. Thats one of the reasons he spends so little time focusing on what really should be the center of his campaign - his 20 years of experience in the senate. I think he's trying to pull the wool over voters eyes about his record so peaple can thin k he is a centrist.
Specifically about Iraq. I think we are in Iraq no matter what for a long time, good bar or otherwise.
Why Kerry feels the need to change his stance about the war every few months is beyond me. This basic dishonesty is why I dont like him. He was the 20 year senator who voted against every key weapons sytem in use today and voted to cut CIA funding who now poses himself as a national security candidate based on his 4 monts of swit service on vietnam. THe guy is basically dishonest about himself to himself and everyone else, which really scares me.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Hes in a bad spot. The economic, miltitary and political damage that Bush has done will not be undone in the next presidential term. It will take a decade at least and much longer then that to pay off the deficits that Bush ran.
You need a lesson in Economics, Debt, and deficits.
EVERY recession this country has had has been followed by a deficit of about 5% GDP,
Why, you ask? Good question.
Because as tax revenues fall the Government must pick up the slack for funding ALL the INTITALMENT programs that have been created. medicare/medicaid, Social Security etc.
Through in a War, CEO thieves creating miss trust in the Stock Market, which has caused foreign investment to flee, and the bogus tech boom that went bust because of poor business fundamentals and what do you have,
That’s right a 4.8% of GDP deficit (the only true measure).
So about this “record” deficit (that is at the historical average.)
The Record is 38% post WWII. And the past 20-year average is about 6%.
So Bush has done a great job at KEEPING THE DEFICIT DOWN DURING A TIME OF WAR.
So we are right were we would have been for any President after a recession.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
He is a centrist no matter how you see him ....
LOL - please step away from the crack pipe
Nope- he's for the war this week after he was against it last week and before he is against it again next week
my goodness - must be good dope in Europe and Canada this time of year - LOL
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Pongo Kerry is not a centrist, his 20 year record as one of the most left wing people in the senate is enought evidence of that. Thats one of the reasons he spends so little time focusing on what really should be the center of his campaign - his 20 years of experience in the senate. I think he's trying to pull the wool over voters eyes about his record so peaple can thin k he is a centrist.
Specifically about Iraq. I think we are in Iraq no matter what for a long time, good bar or otherwise.
Why Kerry feels the need to change his stance about the war every few months is beyond me. This basic dishonesty is why I dont like him. He was the 20 year senator who voted against every key weapons sytem in use today and voted to cut CIA funding who now poses himself as a national security candidate based on his 4 monts of swit service on vietnam. THe guy is basically dishonest about himself to himself and everyone else, which really scares me.
You didnt answer my question. you just babbled. He has no choice but voice support for the war. For the reasons I have explained to you twice and you have ignored twice. Lets drop this one and chock it up to your increadable open mindedness.
-
Pongo, Kerry has the most liberal voting record in the Senate...Centrist? LMAO! I guess they don't teach American political science in Canaduh? Damn good troll though, you even got me nibbling on that one ;)
-
Originally posted by Eagler
LOL - please step away from the crack pipe
Nope- he's for the war this week after he was against it last week and before he is against it again next week
my goodness - must be good dope in Europe and Canada this time of year - LOL
As apposed to yourself who is always for it. You just change the reasons why when last weeks reason is revealed as a lie.
-
Pongo I answered your question.
"Specifically about Iraq. I think we are in Iraq no matter what for a long time, good bar or otherwise."
Thats an obvious reality isnt it?
What isnt so mobvious is why Kerry is so consitently dishonest about his record and his stance of the war..
-
Originally posted by Pongo
As apposed to yourself who is always for it. You just change the reasons why when last weeks reason is revealed as a lie.
Kerry said the war was OK WMD or not. Please Pongo, let it go...
-
Originally posted by Pongo
As apposed to yourself who is always for it. You just change the reasons why when last weeks reason is revealed as a lie.
have never changed my belief Iraq was the best next move in the terror war - the dems and libs are the majority of the side switchers
it isn't about Iraq,
Iraq is just the latest most handy excuse for the haters of Bush to try to remove him & his admin from office with help from the likes of your mentor, moore-on
-
Originally posted by Eagler
my goodness - must be good dope in ... Canada this time of year - LOL
But of course. There's good dope in Canada year round. Hydroponics yannow.?
In all seriousness though I like the post that referred to the economics of the presidency.
Who ever is in has only moderate control over the economy and the real impact is felt only in the following decade or so.
Oh sure - there's occasional Fug-ups and interventions that have real impact but in the long term but for the most part its pissing in the wind. Congress has the real budgetary power.
Bush didn't do a good job on the deficit for one simple reason - he spent on war and cut taxes. I don't care what math you use the stimulous effect of the tax cuts was misplaced and won't cover the cost of the war and security spending his term has generated.
What I find amazing though is that Americans spend so much time pointing fingers. Every democratic presidential candidate in recent memory has been accused of the flip flop. Every Republican president has flip-flopped on something at some point.
Duh. They're both politicians, which means when they aren't kissing babies (or interns) they're stealing their lollipops (or virtue).
Bush and Kerry - I wouldn't trust either one. But mercifully I don't have to choose between them.
-
So Now Kerry is not a centrist but the most liberal man in the senate!
16 of the 19 years he was in the senate he voted for the Pentagons funding but he is the most liberal man in the sentate.
How do you debate such dishonest idiocy.
My resonse to the thread topic stands. No reply from GH or any of his host of suporters other then GH saying "of course we are staying in Iraq right or wrong" which if it does anything supports my resonse to this thread.
-
It will take a decade at least and much longer then that to pay off the deficits that Bush ran.
====
so which is it? a decade at least or much longer? sounds like you been listenin to too much kerry pongo.
and lets not forget the way the government operates regarding deficits and budgets. Congress, both houses, put the $$ amount on the check, the president signs the check. They are a team and must work together to fail or succeed. I always love this time of the poilitical season watching the two kids rant and rave about how the other is to blame when the system requires them both to cooperate to pass any budget or law.
-
Have you become so left wing that you actually consider Keery a centrist?
-
The economic damage,
Specifically what economic damage?
-
If Kerry babbles how much he is against the war
He's already done that. another flip flop
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Have you become so left wing that you actually consider Keery a centrist?
-
We all see what Bush is doing......some like it, some don't.
I wish Kerry would tell us WHAT HE WILL DO...I mean concretely....display a plan with steps....
More lines like, " roll up our sleeves and dig into the problem..." and I will vomit.
Just tell us how you will do it John.....or can't you stick to the plan long enough to publish it?
-
He has no choice but voice support for the war.
Your kidding Pongo ... right ?
Well ... he had a choice when voicing his support for the Vietnam War ... back in the day ... why not now ?
-
flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflopflip flopflipflopflipflopflipflopf lipflopflipflopflipflopflipfl opflipflopflipflopflipflopfli pflopflipflopflipflopflipflop flipflopflipflopflipflopflipf lopflipflopflipflopflipflopfl ipflopflipflopflipflopflipflo pflipflopflipflopflipflop
-
Originally posted by Adogg
..... stimulous effect of the tax cuts was misplaced.
:confused: WTF are you talking about.
"misplaced stimulous"
When you try to sound smarter then you are, you most often sound like a fool.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
He is a centrist .
National Journal's vote ratings rank members of Congress on how they vote relative to each other on a conservative-to-liberal scale in each chamber. The scores, which have been compiled each year since 1981, are based on lawmakers' votes in three areas: economic policy, social policy, and foreign policy. The scores are determined by a computer-assisted calculation that ranks members from one end of the ideological spectrum to the other, based on key votes -- 62 in the Senate in 2003 -- selected by National Journal reporters and editors.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37351
The National Journal said today Kerry's rating of 96.5 is far ahead of the scores of Democratic leaders such as Sen. Ted Kennedy and Sen. Hillary Clinton,
The publication says, "To be sure, Kerry's ranking as the No. 1 Senate liberal in 2003 – and his earning of similar honors three times during his first term, from 1985 to 1990 – will probably have opposition researchers licking their chops."
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0204/022704nj1.htm
The results of the vote ratings show that Kerry was the most liberal senator in 2003, with a composite liberal score of 96.5. But Edwards wasn't far behind: He had a 2003 composite liberal score of 94.5, making him the fourth-most-liberal senator.
Kerry has compiled a generally more liberal voting record. After winning election to the Senate in 1984, he ranked among the most-liberal senators during three years of his first term, according to National Journal's vote ratings. In those years -- 1986, 1988, and 1990 -- Kerry did not vote with Senate conservatives a single time out of the total of 138 votes used to prepare those ratings
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5CPolitics%5Carchive%5C200407%5CPOL20040707c.html
The ADA gave Democrat Walter Mondale a lifetime rating of 90 percent, the RNC noted, while John Kerry's lifetime ADA rating is 92 percent.
Mondale's running mate Geraldine Ferraro received a 79 percent lifetime ADA rating, while John Edwards' lifetime ADA rating is 81 percent.
Americans for Democratic Action says it judges politicians' liberal tendencies, based on 20 key votes on a wide range of social and economic issues, both domestic and international.
http://usconservatives.about.com/library/weekly/aastatesrankeda.htm
Ranking of states, most conservative to least conservative, based on Senate voting records:
1 Oklahoma
2 Idaho
3 Texas
4 Kentucky
5 Kansas
6 Arizona
7 Wyoming
8 Utah
9 Tennessee
10 Virginia
11 Mississippi
12 Alabama
13 New Hampshire
14 Ohio
15 Alaska
16 Colorado
17 Nebraska
18 South Carolina
19 Pennsylvania
20 Arkansas
21 Nevada
22 North Carolina
23 Missouri
24 Maine
25 Montana
26 Indiana
27 Illinois
28 Iowa
29 Oregon
30 New Mexico
31 Georgia
32 Vermont
33 Louisiana
34 West Virginia
35 North Dakota
36 Delaware
37 Rhode Island
38 Florida
39 South Dakota
40 Connecticut
41 Wisconsin
42 New York
43 Hawaii
44 California
45 Michigan
46 Washington
47 New Jersey
48 Maryland
49 Minnesota
50 Massachusetts
If you got proof he's centrist, I'd like to see
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Kerry has to keep appearences
Kerry babbles
well dood you got 2 parts of your post right
-
Originally posted by JBA
:confused: WTF are you talking about.
"misplaced stimulous"
When you try to sound smarter then you are, you most often sound like a fool.
Let me educate you some boy.
Misplaced as in aimed at the wrong segment of the economy to stimulate growth.
Tax cuts that benefit the upper tiers of the tax base do not generate consumer spending. You start with people who have to spend money to survive. i.e. the poor and working poor. Its been a basic economic truism since before WWII. Basic needs expenditures like food, clothing, housing work their way through the economy into other forms of spending. You give a tax cut to somone who already has equity in a home or personal savings and you don't really do much, it tends to get put away in more savings where it earns a pittance in interest. No stimulous. No economic growth. You still with me?
I suggest you read some of the fine analysis put out by the World Bank and International Monetary fund in Washington. Even the economics journals from any of the top ten Universities in the US should be fairly representative in that regard. They're sometimes confused about how best to achieve that but they've got smarter people than you and I who've drawn the same conclusions.
Oh and for future reference it helps if you ask for an explanation if you don't understand. Kay JBA?
[edited for speeling] :D
-
Originally posted by Pongo
So Now Kerry is not a centrist but the most liberal man in the senate!
Yep.
Check out the ADA.
ABOUT ADA (http://www.adaction.org/about.htm)
ADA is America's oldest independent liberal lobbying organization. In the spirit of the New Deal and ADA founders Eleanor Roosevelt, renowned economist John Kenneth Galbraith, and former Senator and Vice President Hubert Humphrey we lobby through coalition partnerships, through direct advocacy, and through the media. Our lobbying philosophy is based on democratic action - motivating our grassroots members to lobby their senators and representatives as constituent-advocates.
This isn't the vast right wing conspiracy trying to put a hit on Kerry. It's LIBERALS complimenting a true liberal.
ADA Voting Records For The Announced Democratic Ticket (http://www.adaction.org/KerryEdwardsVR.htm)
How ADA Scores Congress
Since ADA's founding in 1947, the Annual Voting Records have served as the standard measure of political liberalism. Combining 20 key votes on a wide range of social and economic issues, both domestic and international, the Liberal (LQ) provides a basic overall picture of an elected official's political position.
Year Senator
Kerry Edwards
Lifetime 92 81
2003 85 65
2002 85 70
2001 95 95
2000 90 85
1999 95 90
Centrist? Not hardly.... and it's the Liberals who say so.
-
CANT ANY OF YOU ADD???????
The LA Times today (not even close to being a right wing rag) ran a story titled
Kerry's Iraq plan: DOA (dead on arival for thos that dont know)
To summarize the article....kerry's whole policy on Iraq thus far has been to gain the international support that Bush "failed" to do and slowly phase out the majority of our troops with those of our allies.
SORRY KERRY AINT HAPPENING is the response from German and France today. Even if Bush is defeated our allies will not support military operations in Iraq.
NOW TO MY POINT:
Kerry realizes he is now FUBAR and has to back track.....IE "I'd support the war without WMDs" comment. All his criticism of Bush is biting him in the bellybutton and he's having to change his tune.
Anyone else noticing a pattern here?
-
(http://www.theforce.net/humor/captioning/pics/caption63_sm.jpg)
-
Kerry is an expert at this:
Here are some letters he wrote to his constituents during the first gulf war. Note the dates..
Jan. 22, 1991: "Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition . . . to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."
Jan. 31, 1991:"Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."
What a pyscho.
-
Toad. where those the most liberal scores that any senator achieved?
-
"Anyone else noticing a pattern here?"
Yes I see a patern. Your somehow blameing Kerry for Iraq.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
"Anyone else noticing a pattern here?"
Yes I see a patern. Your somehow blameing Kerry for Iraq.
How am I blameing him.....when did I say that in my post.
Geesh you guys whine about everything dont ya. "Dont talk about his military service" "dont talk about his quick change of minds"
The guy is backtracking here and seriously changing his tune.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
"Anyone else noticing a pattern here?"
Yes I see a patern. Your somehow blameing Kerry for Iraq.
He bares no responsiblty for Iraq except that he voted for the war in his position as US senator. Moreover he constantly told the US public that Saddam was a threat.
If Kerry was a republican you would hate his guts Pongo.
It's really hilliarious how a guy like you, who claims tro oppose the Iraq war is so so supportive of a US senator who voted for the war and lied to the US public about what a threat Saddam Hussieans Iraq was to the USA...
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
How am I blameing him.....when did I say that in my post.
Geesh you guys whine about everything dont ya. "Dont talk about his military service" "dont talk about his quick change of minds"
The guy is backtracking here and seriously changing his tune.
None of us can critiques Keery's acts in ythe senate. That is unless yoiu were or currently are a US senator. So shut up!
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Toad. where those the most liberal scores that any senator achieved?
I don't know.
I can give you this though:
List says Kerry top Senate liberal (http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040227-111241-3716r.htm)
Sen. John Kerry was the "No. 1 Senate liberal in 2003," according to new rankings by the National Journal.
The publication rated all 100 senators' votes on 32 economic issues, 15 social policy issues and 15 foreign policy issues, and found the Massachusetts senator and presidential hopeful more liberal than any of his colleagues.
The magazine noted that Mr. Kerry had the most liberal record three other times in his 20 years in Congress: in 1986, 1988 and 1990......
.....The American Conservative Union (ACU) gave him a 13 rating on its conservative scale for 2003, with 100 being the most conservative. His rating was higher than the 10 rating or lower scored by Mr. Kennedy and 13 other Democrats. This was partly because Mr. Kerry missed three votes, which boosted his average.
Mr. Kerry has a lifetime career rating of 5 from the ACU, slightly above the group's lifetime career 3 score for Mr. Kennedy.
The Americans for Democratic Action, a prominent liberal advocacy group, gives Mr. Kerry a lifetime career rating of 92 on a 100-point scale, with 100 being the most liberal. Mr. Kerry's rating is higher than fellow Democratic candidate Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat.
Now, National Journal is proably best described as Conservative as is the American Conservative Union. However, Americans for Democratic Action can only be described as very liberal.
In any event, there is no way one can describe Kerry as "centrist" using his Senate career as the measuring stick.
-
Not unless you need to believe that he is a centrist..
-
Half a mo!
Kerry is saying the same thing you cons have been saying since the WMD's were negafound.
Yet this somehow makes him .... more liberal. Yikes!
We are in bizzaro land.
-
No, I think we are in "I'll say anything my handlers tell me to say if it will help me win" land.
It's why they are studiously avoiding his Senate voting record and his lack of "leadership" as evidenced by the lack of bills he authored or coauthored.
What the heck happened to Lieberman? During the last campaign, people were saying that he and Cheney were the intelligent parts of the duos and that they should be running for Prez and not VP.
Now Cheney is certainly not well thought of and the Dems couldn't seem to remember what Ol' Joe even looked like.
I could easily have voted for Lieberman this time around against Bush.
Instead, I get someone I just can't vote for at all. Again. :(
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Half a mo!
Kerry is saying the same thing you cons have been saying since the WMD's were negafound.
Yet this somehow makes him .... more liberal. Yikes!
We are in bizzaro land.
Yet he's also said the president "missled us into war" How is that so MT. Two completly opposite opinions in less than 6 months time??????
MT explain this one to me.....please
Keeping in mind he's also said that he would never had voted to give the president authority to go to war if he'd had the right info
AND
Since 98 hes contended that Sadam is a threat w/ weapons and needs to be dealt with.
Explain it....I'm sooooooo want to hear the spin on this
EDIT: actually you're kinda right....we have been saying this for months. Kerry will say and do anything to get a vote.
ABB!
-
Saying we were "missled into war" and still thinking that there are good reasons to fight it are not mutually exclusive and do not constitute a flip flop.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Saying we were "missled into war" and still thinking that there are good reasons to fight it are not mutually exclusive and do not constitute a flip flop.
yet he was saying the same thing bush was saying LOOOOONG before bush took office.
AGAIN explain this to me cause I arnt very smart yooo know
-
Originally posted by Pongo
No. But but you must admit that his hands are tied about support for Iraq. He is a centrist no matter how you see him and he will have to deal with Iraq if hes elected. Probably for the whole 4 years at least. So stating now that he is going to pull them out would just cripple his abiltiy to deal with the situation if and when he is in charge.
Its the trap that Bush set for congress.
Vote against the war. Un patriotic or cowardly
Opps the evidence was bogus...but you must support the troops in time of war!
Re election time..well you supported the war too!
New president. denied the luxuy of doing anything but an orderly withdrawl.
I could just say to you that basically you just disagree with anything Kerry does..but I will answer your question. Although you didnt take the time to really think about my post.
Kerry is a centrist?!?!?!?!? You know, you truly are a total idiot. Kerry's voting record is to the LEFT of Ted Kennedy, and Hilary Clinton. Before Kerry, Ted Kennedy was the most liberal senator alive for nearly 20 YEARS. Even now, the only two sentators MORE LIBERAL than Ted Kennedy are John Forbes Kerry and John Edwards. How could anyone so entranced with John Kerry know so little about Kerry? There are no members in the senate or in congress who have a voting record as liberal as the two democratic candidates for the highest offices in the country. Not Boxer, not Feinstein, not Kennedy, not Clinton, not ANYONE. Those two are NOT centrists, study their freaking voting records
-
Im not entranced with him. You hit it right on the head. I just find the slavish attacks on him hillarios/disgusting. And if the most liberal politition in the US voted for the pentegon budget 16 of his 19 years then what is the difference between left and right?
-
As JBA stated, their respective stances on a combination of economic policy, social policy, and foreign policy. Not on one single stance on a single issue.
Pongo, you are brighter than you're acting here.
I agree with Toad, MT and others. The debate should be on the candidates stances on the ISSUES.
Kerry and Bush need to start addressing the issues, and let their voting records, etc. be what is used to frame the debate.
-
Be forewarned, this is not an unbiased site; they clearly don't like Kerry. However, they do document each vote so you can follow up on a paritcular one. There are always some votes that may have a very good reason for the choice made that is not apparent from a simple title or short descripition of the bill.
OTOH, this will give a good overall picture of how he votes I think.
Learn who JFK is by his voting record (http://www.kerryquotes.com/votingrecord.htm)
-
Toad,
site no workey
-
Thanks, Gun. Fixed it; bad copy of the addy.
-
Oh, and one more thing.
If this is the state of how the candidates and those who participate in political debates, including this BBS, then we are truly screwed.
And I don't think it gets any better in Yurop, either, as proven by our Yuropean posters anyway. :)
-
AADOG...AADOG....
I do hereby affirm ,that as a middle class tax payer of these formaly United States of America. My family did recieve a tax cut,monies I earned were in legal paper money returned to me .Of said money I did help my daughter repair her car.
Which had the effect of providing stable and profitable work for a small business.
Which in turn provided work for a mech.
Who bought parts for said engine, thus putting to work those who manufacture said parts.
thus putting to work those who clean said parts. Thus putting to work those that deliver said parts. etc .etc. etc.
Now mutiply that by millions of people and the idea becomes simple to understand.
-
Originally posted by Adogg
Misplaced as in aimed at the wrong segment of the economy to stimulate growth.
Were would you "aim Tax cuts. But to those that pay taxes.
[Tax cuts that benefit the upper tiers of the tax base do not generate consumer spending. You start with people who have to spend money to survive. i.e. the poor and working poor. Its been a basic economic truism since before WWII. Basic needs expenditures like food, clothing, housing work their way through the economy into other forms of spending. You give a tax cut to somone who already has equity in a home or personal savings and you don't really do much, it tends to get put away in more savings where it earns a pittance in interest. No stimulous. No economic growth. You still with me?
[edited for speeling] :D
the working poor do not pay taxes, It's called earned income tax credits or they are making to little to pay, Secondly I have never heard of the working poor starting a business and employing anyone.
Furthermore since when do those who make enough to pay taxes stop eating, driving, going out to restaurants, movies, theaters, get their cars washed, detailed, shopping for cloths paying tuitions, daycare, baby sitters, you starting to get the picture?
These people employ others, by spending.
Get off the class warfare tactic, and open your eyes, Those that make money, after having avoided having children out of wedlock, staying in high school, passing college and taking on tremendous risk and debt, to achieve a higher stander of living, are not the bad guys. You hanging in there?
They are also the ones whom invest in small companies, stocks,
Originally posted by Adogg
I suggest you read some of the fine analysis put out by the World Bank and International Monetary fund in Washington. Even the economics journals from any of the top ten Universities in the US should be fairly representative in that regard. [edited for speeling] :D
The IMF has not helped a single country it has lent money to. That’s not the best source to quote if you’re looking for credibility.
-
"I SEE COMPLEXITIES"
I see a two faced gas bag - LOL
LandSlide Bush
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Kerry is an expert at this:
Here are some letters he wrote to his constituents during the first gulf war. Note the dates..
Jan. 22, 1991: "Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition . . . to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."
Jan. 31, 1991:"Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."
What a pyscho.
Kerry stance on Iraq befor Howard Dean made him change his postion to win the primeries.
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-
and there in lies the truth.....allthough he doesnt have it so bad because most his base says "ABB anyone but bush"
were he had problems in the primarys is howard dean is dead against the war in Iraq. Kerry saw this as a threat as well as his vote a tarnish on his outstanding libral senate record so he had to change his tune.
Now he's realizing this isnt Iowa anymore and his opinion needs to change again.
Really it all depends on who he's talking to as to wich side of an issue he's on. Now....he's being called on it.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Im not entranced with him. You hit it right on the head. I just find the slavish attacks on him hillarios/disgusting. And if the most liberal politition in the US voted for the pentegon budget 16 of his 19 years then what is the difference between left and right?
Yes you are, you are entranced with Kerry.
Funny, you dont seem to find the slavish idiotic attacks on Bush so objectinable Pongo....
Funny sort of centrist you are Pongo... What happend to you Pongo? You didnt post such obviously bad posts before...
-
I loved Bush's response yesterday..."
"Now, almost two years after he voted for the war in Iraq, and almost 220 days after switching positions to declare himself the anti-war candidate, my opponent has found a new nuance. After months of questioning my motives and even my credibility, Sen. Kerry now agrees with me.
Bush added sarcastically that Kerry still had time to change his position: "There are still 84 days left in the campaign."
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop
Flip Flop Flip Flop