No matter how you slice it, you can't convince any good-thinking person that an illegal and preemptive war against Iraq was justified. Speaking of illegal... how about this: John Kerry - April 18th, Meet the Press, 1971 "Yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of ot
This was also false. France had made very clear that it objected to the US led war because it believed that the sanctions were working and that Saddam was disarmed. Bush knew this, but was willing to play on and fan US hatred of France so that people did not realise the importance. France did claim that Iraq had disarmed. France
GWB and the neocons were determined for regime change in Iraq before 9/11, no matter who agreed or disagreed with them. If, by neocons, you mean Bill Clinton, you are right. The Bill Clinton Administration changed the policy on Iraq to "Regime Changed."
Obama did not talk about two america's... he came from poverty and he was easily the only speaker at the Demo convention (including Kerry) that actually made sense. Of course you could only see him on cable TV. The big three networks weren't showing him. Obama was not liberal enough.
One man that served UNDER Kerry for 2.5 months (out of the 4 he served) on his swift boat appeared on Medved and O'Reilly today/tonight says that Kerry was an idiot in Vietnam. He constantely put his men at risk for no reason. AND the picture of Kerry with the flak jacket and Fragmentation grenades is a fake. Kerry and ALL OTHER MEN who served in the Navy in Vietnam were not issued fragmentation granades. They were banned by international law at the ti
Yes, Steven, please explain further what Kerry's solutions are?
Inforgeek... you point out a lot of "republican" divorces. What does that have to do with sexual perversion? Y'wanna know why Dems seem so "perverted"? It's because their opponents keep bringing up their sex lives instead of discussing the relevant issues. Was Clinton a bad president? You know he wasn't, because they des
From jeblackstar : Wouldn't it be a better question to ask why the republicans are having a convention? After all, the democrats actually had people running against Kerry. Not at all... the purpose of a convention is to trumpet out your leaders, offers some ideas on what your parties "agenda"
Kerry has the legal right to not accept the nomination. He knew this loop hole when he voted for the campain finance reforms that are now in effect. People make use of loop holes everyday. The democratic party crys foul about it everyday too. Continually shunning the "rich" for doing so with regard to tax laws, even though most democrats in congress use the same loop holes. 8 of the richest 10 congressmen are democrats. So Kerry is not breakin
Ok, dude, I am not a Kerry or Bush supporter, but I simply cannot believe that you wrote that. If I supported either of the major candiates, more alike than they would ever admit, it would be Kerry. Be fair, man. Like since you have already trashed Bush, why not list some of the wrong things about Bush, like: -He is doing his
Bush made a judgment call based on intelligence information. THAT is not flip-flopping. What happened in 1941 in Pearl Harbor? Was intelligence information on Japan's military movements and motivations dead on accurate? How about the Cuban Missile Crisis? There was plenty of information made available to JFK that would have prevented the scandal OR at least allowed him to make a move MON
Although I do not entirely disagree with Dynosoar, that has little to do with how one should view Kerry as a possible President. There are plenty of "ugly" people that would make for great presidents. This one just happens to be a spineless, flip-flopping, extreme liberal, hiding in moderates clothing.
enough with the "flip flop" already. He didnt flip flop on anything. He had one opinion when he was told that there was proof of WMD in Iraq, and another when he found out that was bogus....just like the rest of us. Kerry said this in an op-ed piece he wrote for the New York Times. It was printed in
Kerry's foreign policy includes "a new era of alliances" to sidestep the current go solo style the White House has been doing. His foreign policy advisers include some of Clinton's people. The Presidents job is to
No kidding, have you watched the democratic debates? Kerry and Edwards were the most comprehensible men at the table, but Kerry was clear, consise, and somthing Bush has a problem with, comprehensible. The jokes yo
So, BulbousHead, what are you doing with your tax return?
I agree, for the most part, with aconservative. Not only do many Kerry supports have ZERO ideas of what they want him to do or change... Kerry doesn't really either. So far in this campaign he has basically told us how bad we, as Americans have, and how much worse it will get with another four years of Bush. It makes you wonder if three years ago the US was in the best shape on it's life
PolMach Forums
JoeUser Forums