Kerry Denounces 'Inept' Bush Foreign Policy

Kerry Denounces 'Inept' Bush Foreign Policy
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/04/politics/campaigns/04KERR.html

"Senator John Kerry attacked President Bush yesterday for an "arrogant, inept, reckless" foreign policy and laid out a detailed plan for prosecuting the war on terrorism far differently while "building bridges to the Islamic world."

Mr. Kerry, a Democrat from Massachusetts and a presidential candidate, called for a harder line toward Saudi Arabia and a softer approach to Iran....

"Triumphalism may make the armchair warriors in the seats of power feel good, but it does not serve America or the world's interests." ...On Iraq, Mr. Kerry accused the administration of considering a "cut and run strategy" in which it would speed up the timetable for withdrawing troops as a ploy to win votes in November 2004, but at the risk of "the hijacking of Iraq by terrorist groups and former Baathists."

I always thought that he was hurting himself when he went after Dean and I think now he realizes it. Every time Dean got attacked, he just got more money.

ROAR!!! teeheeee

.

We're talking about Kerry here, not Dean. Are you trying to put up Dean like the Republicans used Clinton's cock? To divert attention from your boys failings?

Why yes...yes you are!

http://www.howardsmusings.com/2003/02/20/salon_on_the_campaign_trail_with_the_unbush.html

"s I've said about eight times today," he says, annoyed -- that Saddam must be disarmed, but with a multilateral force under the auspices of the United Nations. If the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

If, by any chance, you are a Dean person, I hope you maintain support for him if and when he becomes President and in the death grip of Washington politics. He will make more than one ambiguous stance or flawed decision during his term because of that grip, and that shouldn't throw you off.

Kerry is one of the good guys in the Senate. He's been a model Democrat, and he's shown he can be counted on as solid. Do not put him on the same level as Bush.

what a hypocrit... go home and make ketchup :D

.

That would at least show that Kerry isn't a hypocrit. I don't know what's worse... that Kerry is too inept to see this is the only way he can retain any legitimacy on foreign policy, or that he is spineless and voted because the country "needed to act".

ABB - but Kerry is low on the list. :D

Wednesday 18 June 2003

LEBANON, N.H. (AP) Democratic presidential candidate John 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. "That"s one reason why I"m running to be president of the United States."

.

Notice "he misled us" when it was perfectly within the right and ability of every congressperson to scrutinize and question that bill...if they had banded together and nade enough of a fuss about it.

But they didn't. Kerry did the Insider thing along with his colleagues. Cover ass first.

or did the omnipotent Kerry orchestrate the whole thing?

His judgment on IWR does not bode well for higher office. Leadership is an important component... maybe the most important component of the office.

If he's a lemming when the chips are down, and can't say NO to a stupid idea, and goes along with it because he was "duped".....then I'm not impressed.

My goodness what a high bar. I'll bet Kerry appreciates you for that.

"...and presume that he believes Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat to our security."

http://www.liberaloasis.com/dean.htm

.

.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=108&topic_id=24284&mesg_id=24451

I guess it's OK when Dean says it, but horrible when Kerry says the same exact thing

What's your deal man? You are bashing Democrats in another thread and now railing against Dean here.

My qualms about Kerry are quite justified. And notice I'm not saying critical about Gephardt. Gephardt believed that going into Iraq was the right thing to do because he sought out the intelligence. And Gephardt isn't backpeddling, he's supporting his past actions and pointed the blame squarely at Bush.

I disagreed with the pro-war Dem's... but so far, Kerry is the only one to backpeddle and change his tune. And how coincidently he does so after Dean keeps beating him in the polls. Kerry's trying to save his sinking campaign by trying to talk tough on the war, Bush, the Patriot Act, etc... and I'm not buying it.

It's OK when Dean says it, but not when Kerry says it. Why?

"Because Kerry voted for IWR"

which shows how dishonest the Deanies are. Their real complaint is IWR, but they'll act as if "We were misled" is what upsets them.

Until Dean says it. Then it's OK

"s I've said about eight times today," he says, annoyed -- that Saddam must be disarmed, but with a multilateral force under the auspices of the United Nations. If the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice."

http://www.howardsmusings.com/2003/02/20/salon_on_the_campaign_trail_with_the_unbush.html

He only supported it if there was incontravertable proof of a clear and imminent danger to the US (which there never was). Kerry, Gep and Lieberman, on the other hand, told Bush "whatever" and posed for IWR photo ops in the Rose Garden.

but I'm not talking about anyone here ::CUTE::

Neither Kerry or Edwards supported the invasion. Don't put them with Gephardt and Lieberman on this.

YOU have just told a flat out lie.

What are you talking about?

You can agree with it or not, but Kerry has been very consistant with his reasoning on the IWR. A lot of people here on DU don't like the fact that he HASN'T backpeddled on it - by admitting he was wrong.

I don't understand your point.

a couple of days ago. The article and the thread is on GD, I started it. Check it out.

also, if I remember correctly, it was Rand Beers who said we might need to send in more US troops. However, if John Kerry, or any other candidate for that matter, decided, because of a changing situation, that more US troops were needed, I wouldn't consider it a "flip flop".

Look, what's going on in Iraq is not a game - it's not something I feel should used for cheap political gain. Many in the military have always thought we needed more troops there and if Kerry, or Dean, or any of the other seven candidates, through reassessing a fluid situation, arrives at the conclusion that we need to send in more troops - I wouldn't criticize them for it.

LOL

to ADJHS. That was the whole point of posting the Kerry flipflop/change of heart (choose your favorite description).

Provide an adult response if you want to be taken seriously.

although he has been working it relentlessly. It's just not memorable or clever. I've tried to tell him that he needs help in the wit department, but the tin-eared never listen.

what to do? :scared:

But hey, he can ride a motorcycle onto a TV stage with the best of 'em!

Tuesday, December 02, 2003

State/New England News Digest

Kerry wants parts of Patriot Act quashed

CONCORD – The unlimited detention of suspected terrorists without probable cause, and searching the personal records of American citizens without their knowledge must end, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said Monday.

Kerry and Republican Sen. John E. Sununu of New Hampshire are co-sponsoring legislation to repeal portions of the USA Patriot Act that the Congress approved a few months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Kerry said he would “end the era” of Attorney General John Ashcroft, who Kerry said overstepped authority the law granted him.

A judge should have to approve that it’s appropriate to indefinitely detain someone suspected of terrorism, Kerry said.

The average wait to clear someone to be deported was 80 days, Kerry said.

Kerry’s plan also would place restrictions on roving wiretaps used against suspected terrorists.

WHat a surprise!

The entire PA deal was brought forth out of fear and ignorance. Those who voted for both acts abrogated their congressional duties and did a huge disservice to America in the process.

They need to repeal the whole damn thing, and start over from scratch - this time allowing "time to read it" and plenty of floor debate as well as openness to the public about it.

You can't polish a turd.

that Clinton tried to pass as a response to international terrorism that were blocked by a Republican Congress. So the "entire" bill was NOT bought forth out of fear and ignorance. Many sections of the bill had bipartisan support - and those parts should be kept.

Repealing the whole bill doesn't make sense if the good parts are protecting us from terrorism.

They can't contemplate repealing SOME of the tax cuts.

You and the knitting clutch have that "all" down to an art form.

I'd really be interested to know.

I trust the judgement of Senators Sununu and Kerry to weed out the good parts from the bad.

http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

Have you any idea of his political persuasion before this latter day epiphany on civil rights?

Plus, are you going to let others pick for you what you want "repealed" or would you like to know yourself?

Do you have time to go through the Patriot Act? That's what politicians are for. That's why we "hire" them.
Sununu is a Republican. He, along with many other Republicans, finds fault with the Patriot Act. If Kerry is willing to "trust" him on this issue - that's fine with me.

Kucinich? He has your vote I take it. Nobody else supports repealing the Patriot Act entirely.

And I applaud him for it. He bucks the Congressional trend of CYA (cover your ass) first, responsibility to the American people number five down the list.

Is that correct?

Dean isn't for repealing the whole thing and made comments in acknowledging the need to change things after 9/11. It's a slash and burn issue, not anything you give a shit about. If you did, you'd vote Kucinich.

I think I hear an echo, don't you? :evilgrin:

Or join Dennis is calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq?

he seems to be finding a more powerful message instead of just "attack Dean" which was killing him.I dont think him doing bad in NH will be the end of his campaign.

might not help it much.

His saying the reason he is running for President is because he was misled on the Iraq War Resolution is kind of ingenuous but better late than never. If he gets the nomination he will get my vote.

:kick:

but I can't help but be kinda annoyed everytime Kerry criticizes Bush on stuff like this. Kerry helped Bush along in his goals and I just don't see Kerry as being able to legitimately criticize Bush when he freaking gave him the green light to pull a lot of the crap he's pulling. Is this just me or does anyone feel this way too? Maybe it's just because I don't like Kerry anyway, who knows.