[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by The Left 

John Kerry has nothing to apoligize for.

Harold Ford and the many others that were counting on his support at their rallies who've now asked him to stay home. Maybe he should apologize to them?

[goMac]

“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they're crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.

I’m not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq. It disgusts me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who have.

The people who owe our troops an apology are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it. These Republicans are afraid to debate veterans who live and breathe the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor.

Bottom line, these Republicans want to debate straw men because they’re afraid to debate real men. And this time it won’t work because we’re going to stay in their face with the truth and deny them even a sliver of light for their distortions. No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut and run policy in Afghanistan and a stand still and lose strategy in Iraq.”

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/releas...ase.html?id=33

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Nicko 

Wouldn't want the people to discuss any of the real issues would they?...

Real issues like;

- low unemployment
- economic boom
- home ownership among minorities all time high
- productivity at all time high
- secure homeland post 9/11
- low gas prices

Because really, when it comes to Iraq, the only policy seems to be; "rely on perception". No comprehensive plan or exit strategy has really been publicized by the Dems this election. They're trying to ride out an "anti-Bush" agenda and historically when this is all they've got-they end up with nothing. It is not enough to identify what you're against, you have to identify what you're for. This detail cost them last time and if they're not careful, it'll cost them this time when it has practically been handed them on a silver platter.

The suspense is killing me.

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Given what this man has said about his fellow servicemen historically, few put such a statement past him contrived or not. If a Republican said anything remotely like this, they'd be wiped all over the floor with it.

Given what he normally calls his fellow servicemen (murderers and rapists and terrorizers of Iraqis in the night) just calling them stupid is quite a step up for him. He must have been using such restraint during that speech to not refer to them as murderers and terrorists.

[The Left]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

John Kerry = Chuck Norris = all that is perfect

John Kerry made a true statement. What irks me is to see Ford now calling for an apology. This will blow over if we don't give into the Republican demands.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by The Left 

John Kerry made a true statement. What irks me is to see Ford now calling for an apology. This will blow over if we don't give into the Republican demands.

What statement did he make that was true?

[The Left]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

What statement did he make that was true?

"EDUCATE YOURSELF, OR YOU'LL GET STUCK IN IRAQ"

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by The Left 

"EDUCATE YOURSELF, OR YOU'LL GET STUCK IN IRAQ"

Is Kerry stuck in Iraq? His GPA was lower than Bush's. The only way this statement could be true would be;

- if all those stationed in Iraq were uneducated. Not true.
- if Kerry's education proved superior to Bush's. Not true.
- if Kerry himself had not supported military action in Iraq. Not true.

SO WHICH STATEMENT DID HE MAKE AGAIN THAT WAS TRUE?

[Sky Captain]

Does that go for officers too?

[Sky Captain]

Kerry is stuck on stupid.

[zerostar]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Real issues like;

- low unemployment.

The unemployment rate in the U.S. is misleading. It only shows people looking for work, not people who have given up looking or are off unemployment benefits, you know they drop off after an amount of time.

This detail cost them last time and if they're not careful, it'll cost them this time when it has practically been handed them on a silver platter.

Don't worry they will screw it up I am sure :-)

[marden]

Originally Posted by goMac 

I’m not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq. It disgusts me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who have.

Maybe he should take a listen to NBC Today Show host, Matt Lauer then...

LAUER: And you brought up Michael J. Fox. Let me just ask you: You know, Rush Limbaugh started a lot of controversy when he said perhaps Michael J. Fox was exaggerating or faking these effects of Parkinson's disease in that ad promoting stem cell research. Didn't Rush Limbaugh just say what a lot of people were privately thinking?

INGRAHAM: Well, Michael J. Fox himself, I think, had written that when he testified before Congress, he decided to go off his medication. But this is not about Limbaugh, it's not about Fox. It's about an amendment that claims to ban cloning, Matt, and instead it constitutionalizes the right to clone for the destruction of those embryos that are in the lab.

LAUER: And Sue --

INGRAHAM: That's the fact. It's not about Limbaugh, and the media loves to make it about Limbaugh and Fox. That's not what it's about.

LAUER: But also, Susan, last word. If Michael Fox goes out there politically and puts himself in the fray, he has to expect to be, you know, taken to account, correct?

http://mediamatters.org/items/200610260012

Maybe you should just listen to the President.

Gee, to think this was the Democrat's best and brightest hope.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by goMac 

“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they're crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.

I’m not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq. It disgusts me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who have.

The people who owe our troops an apology are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it. These Republicans are afraid to debate veterans who live and breathe the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor.

Bottom line, these Republicans want to debate straw men because they’re afraid to debate real men. And this time it won’t work because we’re going to stay in their face with the truth and deny them even a sliver of light for their distortions. No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut and run policy in Afghanistan and a stand still and lose strategy in Iraq.”

JohnKerry.com - Press Releases

Wow, are those the words of a bitter, bitter man or what?

And for the record, I like how he tries to belittle Rush Limbaugh for being fat (which he isn't, anymore) before accusing him of belittling Michael J. Fox's Parkinsons (which he never did.)

Apparently, it's not "ok" to criticize someone who enters the political arena and makes an ad supporting candidates of one party under false pretenses, without even reading the bill that he supposedly supports, simply because that person has a disease.

But it's "ok" to call someone "doughy" because they, at one time, were fat. I thought obesity was a disease? Is John Kerry going to make fun of Rush because he's deaf, too?

Kerry just keeps digging! It's Kerry that's in a quagmire now, and it's self-induced. Giggity.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by goMac 

“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they're crazy."

...then Kerry was talking to an awful lot of crazy people. The whole frickin room went silent when he said what he said, and this was on friendly territory. He may have very well thought he was making a clever joke at the expense of Bush, but if so then his humor proved way too deep for his audience.

I don't claim to know whether his faux pas comes from not thinking before he spoke, or thinking too much before he spoke. Either way, it was a monumentally poor choice of words, and he should apologize for the misunderstanding if nothing else.

[marden]

Originally Posted by zerostar 

The unemployment rate in the U.S. is misleading. It only shows people looking for work, not people who have given up looking or are off unemployment benefits, you know they drop off after an amount of time.

Don't worry they will screw it up I am sure :-)

But that has ALWAYS been part of the equation so it is the same factor when the unemployment figures are high or low, therefore irrelevant when assessing the current unemployment figures.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by zerostar 

The unemployment rate in the U.S. is misleading. It only shows people looking for work, not people who have given up looking or are off unemployment benefits, you know they drop off after an amount of time.

Funny how when there is a Democrat in office, and the unemployment is low, nobody says it's misleading.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by zerostar 

The unemployment rate in the U.S. is misleading. It only shows people looking for work, not people who have given up looking or are off unemployment benefits, you know they drop off after an amount of time.

I agree, but this is not a recent anomaly. All things are relative. Our unemployment rate is comparatively very low. You can rest assured if this number were comparatively high, it would be used against the Administration. I believe it works both ways. ***edited to include; nevermind, a host of posters beat me to this punch.

Don't worry they will screw it up I am sure :-)

I'm mixed on whether this is good or bad. A dominant (D) House and Senate would simply launch this President into a host of hearings and defenses against the impeachment onslaught which I believe would handicap the Hill. However, we're also in dire need of more well-rounded representation.

[zerostar]

Originally Posted by marden 

But that has ALWAYS been part of the equation so it is the same factor when the unemployment figures are high or low, therefore irrelevant when assessing the current unemployment figures.

Yes, and? No one has said otherwise? I will say again "The unemployment rate in the U.S. is misleading."

[zerostar]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom 

Funny how when there is a Democrat in office, and the unemployment is low, nobody says it's misleading.

No... Never....

[zerostar]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

However, we're also in dire need of more well-rounded representation.

Too true, I think things will even out somewhat, but no landslides that I can see.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

...then Kerry was talking to an awful lot of crazy people. The whole frickin room went silent when he said what he said, and this was on friendly territory. He may have very well thought he was making a clever joke at the expense of Bush, but if so then his humor proved way too deep for his audience.

I don't claim to know whether his faux pas comes from not thinking before he spoke, or thinking too much before he spoke. Either way, it was a monumentally poor choice of words, and he should apologize for the misunderstanding if nothing else.

Exactly. Look at the faces of the (I assume) loyal young Democrats on stage with him when he cracks the "joke."

No smiles, even. Much less laughter. He didn't even smile as if to indicate "look at me, the wooden guy trying to make a joke."

My problem isn't with his original words, as mangled and stupid as I think they were. My problem is that he continues to refuse to take responsibility for them. He continues to blame "the Republican Hate Machine."

This could all be over with these words from Kerry: "I'm sorry if I offended anyone. My words were poorly chosen."

It wasn't the blow job that got Clinton in trouble. It was trying to deny it/hide it. He could have just said, "I inhaled, Monica swallowed" and it would have been a lot easier. It wasn't the break-in that got Nixon in trouble, it was the cover-up. He could have just said, "Those people say they were working to re-elect me, but I don't want anything to do with them."

When will politicians learn?

[Nicko]

US housing market is crashing and will get worse.

The US dollor is falling --- could crash

China is sitting on a mountain of $1 trillion of soon to be worthless USD. I wonder what they will spend the money on?

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Is Kerry stuck in Iraq? His GPA was lower than Bush's. The only way this statement could be true would be;

- if all those stationed in Iraq were uneducated. Not true.
- if Kerry's education proved superior to Bush's. Not true.
- if Kerry himself had not supported military action in Iraq. Not true.

SO WHICH STATEMENT DID HE MAKE AGAIN THAT WAS TRUE?

I've posted this link before but I think there are lot out there that need to educate themselves about the level of technical training our young guys and gals get when they enter the military. Even those that are fairly uneducated and have been failed by our primary system of public education, do not stay unskilled once the military is done with them. Even the foot soldier in today's military is trained to operate and understand technical equipment that no generation before it has.

Do Something Amazing

There are several video clips at the bottom of each frame.

[BlueSky]

In all of this, you have to ask yourself the question: No matter how lame or dumb you think Kerry is, do you really think he's dumb enough to come out and say that the people serving in Iraq are dumb or uneducated and proceed to alienate most of the country? The guy is the consummate politician. If nothing else, he knows better as a politician to not do that.

He IS, however, stiff and quite possibly not suited for delivering humor of any sort, no matter how hard he tries. Funny how Kerry flubs a dumb joke and Repubs have sparks shooting from their ears, while Bush not only flubs ordinary speech on a daily basis, but (once again) jokes about WMD at the Radio and Television Correspondents' dinner while his charges are dying. THAT'S offensive, not Lurch giving humor a whirl.

And (davesimon) if he said any of our soldiers are "terrorizing people in Iraq", do you actually have the intellectual dishonesty to say that he was referring to all of them? Or could it be he was referring to abu ghraib or the group of soldiers who have been accused of killing an Iraqi family and whatever else has been in the news?

Instead of an apology, though, he comes out and digs a deeper hole.

He's familiar with the Rovian way, he's been through it before. No need to kiss Rove's/Bush's ass, and he learned the hard way what happens when you're not quick to respond to it.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Nicko 

US housing market is crashing and will get worse.

The US dollor is falling --- could crash

China is sitting on a mountain of $1 trillion of soon to be worthless USD. I wonder what they will spend the money on?

Nice try, but OFF TOPIC.

[marden]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

In all of this, you have to ask yourself the question: No matter how lame or dumb you think Kerry is, do you really think he's dumb enough to come out and say that the people serving in Iraq are dumb or uneducated and proceed to alienate most of the country? The guy is the consummate politician. If nothing else, he knows better as a politician to not do that.

He IS, however, stiff and quite possibly not suited for delivering humor of any sort, no matter how hard he tries. Funny how Kerry flubs a dumb joke and Repubs have sparks shooting from their ears, while Bush not only flubs ordinary speech on a daily basis, but (once again) jokes about WMD at the Radio and Television Correspondents' dinner while his charges are dying. THAT'S offensive, not Lurch giving humor a whirl.

And (davesimon) if he said any of our soldiers are "terrorizing people in Iraq", do you actually have the intellectual dishonesty to say that he was referring to all of them? Or could it be he was referring to abu ghraib or the group of soldiers who have been accused of killing an Iraqi family and whatever else has been in the news?

He's familiar with the Rovian way, he's been through it before. No need to kiss Rove's/Bush's ass, and he learned the hard way what happens when you're not quick to respond to it.

Tony Snow just said, all Kerry has to do (and what he has yet to do) is say...

I'm Sorry.

What's so hard about that?

Everyone misspeaks from time to time. Whether you meant to offend or not you say, "I had no intent to offend but if I did, I'M SORRY."

[selowitch]

I'll gladly concede that Kerry's choice of words was extremely poor and does not reflect what he really thinks. Yes, these remarks definitely could be interpreted as an insult to the troops or a suggestion that they are not very intelligent or are there because they did not so well in school. But seriously, even a certifiable Kerry-hater has to admit that this is almost certainly not at all what he meant, and although he didn't apologize (it probably would just add fuel to the fire) I'm quite sure he would take it all back if he could.

Kerry got unfairly demonized in 2004. The fact of the matter remains that he would have been a much more effective president than Bush has been, much more able to provide the country with real security, not just the blundering and blustering of the current administration.

Unfortunately, the country does not appear to consider competence when choosing a president. Instead, they prefer to focus on irrelevancies like what state he comes from, what accent he speaks with, and whether or not he is "good-looking". The Kerry nobody saw during the campaign is the thoughtful, intelligent, gracious person that I know him to be. It simply doesn't come through on national television.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by marden 

Tony Snow just said, all Kerry has to do (and what he has yet to do) is say...

I'm Sorry.

What's so hard about that?

Everyone misspeaks from time to time. Whether you meant to offend or not you say, "I had no intent to offend but if I did, I'M SORRY."

Because he's pissed off and knows that saying "I'm sorry" is exactly what Tony Snowjob/Bush/Rove wants. Politics is more important than ever at the moment (election time), and my guess is that he decided to call attention to the bullshit than to make Dems look weaker than they actually are. Politics.

[marden]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

Because he's pissed off and knows that saying "I'm sorry" is exactly what Tony Snowjob/Bush/Rove wants. Politics is more important than ever at the moment (election time), and my guess is that he decided to call attention to the bullshit than to make Dems look weaker than they actually are. Politics.

At this point you liberals should start hammering Kerry to announce his exit strategy.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

In all of this, you have to ask yourself the question: No matter how lame or dumb you think Kerry is, do you really think he's dumb enough to come out and say that the people serving in Iraq are dumb or uneducated and proceed to alienate most of the country? The guy is the consummate politician. If nothing else, he knows better as a politician to not do that.

Well, I question whether he truly is "the consummate politician" and whether he truly knows better. Kerry, along with many other politicians, are not yet used to a world where you can't say one thing to one group of people and another to another group of people (and get away with it.)

He thought he was in a room of people who agreed with his point of view and made a joke he thought they'd like. Fine. And he botched that joke. Fine.

People's reactions aren't orchestrated by Karl Rove. Some troops and their families are truly pissed off. Why can't he just say that he is sorry if he offended anyone?

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

He IS, however, stiff and quite possibly not suited for delivering humor of any sort, no matter how hard he tries. Funny how Kerry flubs a dumb joke and Repubs have sparks shooting from their ears, while Bush not only flubs ordinary speech on a daily basis, but (once again) jokes about WMD at the Radio and Television Correspondents' dinner while his charges are dying. THAT'S offensive, not Lurch giving humor a whirl.

OK, so nobody can criticize Kerry because he just botched a joke. Then, from now on, nobody can make fun of the President for stumbling over his words. Fair?

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

And (davesimon) if he said any of our soldiers are "terrorizing people in Iraq", do you actually have the intellectual dishonesty to say that he was referring to all of them? Or could it be he was referring to abu ghraib or the group of soldiers who have been accused of killing an Iraqi family and whatever else has been in the news?

The exact quote from John Kerry: "And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the–of–the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not..."

Hmm... Where, exactly does he mention Abu Ghraib? Or where he says "some American solidiers." The facts are hard to deal with, I know. He CLEARLY isn't saying something about the asshats that tortured people in Abu Ghraib.

He's saying the very same things that he said about the soldiers in Vietnam about the soldiers in Iraq. He insults, then he runs from his own words and points fingers at other people trying to deflect blame.

Do I think he was talking about EVERY soldier? Of course not. And I never said that.

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

He's familiar with the Rovian way, he's been through it before. No need to kiss Rove's/Bush's ass, and he learned the hard way what happens when you're not quick to respond to it.

You call me intellectually dishonest and then seriously turn Kerry's missteps as a "Rovian" plot? Nobody is asking him to kiss anyone's ass. Just come out and say that he's sorry!

[marden]

Originally Posted by selowitch 

and although he didn't apologize (it probably would just add fuel to the fire) I'm quite sure he would take it all back if he could.

"Ugh. Fire...BAD!"

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

Because he's pissed off and knows that saying "I'm sorry" is exactly what Tony Snowjob/Bush/Rove wants. Politics is more important than ever at the moment (election time), and my guess is that he decided to call attention to the bullshit than to make Dems look weaker than they actually are. Politics.

"This should not be hard. Everybody in public life had an occasion where they have said something they wish they could take back. So what you do is simply apologize." - Tony Snow

Wow, he sure seems like he's frothing at the mouth, doesn't he? He's giving the guy an out - even admitting that everyone, including himself, has made statements they wish they could take back.

Yep, it's all an evil neocon Rove plot...

That darned Evil Republican Hate Machine made him say it!!

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

...then Kerry was talking to an awful lot of crazy people. The whole frickin room went silent when he said what he said, and this was on friendly territory. He may have very well thought he was making a clever joke at the expense of Bush, but if so then his humor proved way too deep for his audience.

I don't claim to know whether his faux pas comes from not thinking before he spoke, or thinking too much before he spoke. Either way, it was a monumentally poor choice of words, and he should apologize for the misunderstanding if nothing else.

For the misunderstanding? So.............IOW, he was warning the students that they better study hard and get good grades, or they might end up being the President of the United States?????????

Oh I get it. He's a comedian. But don't we already pay people who do stand up? Those guys over at the Improv need to make room for Kerry. He's a riot I'll tell you. And the way he pulls off the jokes. What a guy!

[RAILhead]

[tie]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Because really, when it comes to Iraq, the only policy seems to be; "rely on perception". No comprehensive plan or exit strategy has really been publicized by the Dems this election. They're trying to ride out an "anti-Bush" agenda and historically when this is all they've got-they end up with nothing.

I think it is clear to everyone that we can't "stay the course" deeper and deeper into the pit. Everyone except Bush, that is.

I don't think Dems need to present a comprehensive plan or exit strategy. Details of military strategy should be left to the experts, not voted on. And even if Dems won narrow majority in both houses, they couldn't set the military strategy anyway. They can, though, force a change in course.

At the moment, neither party is offering good alternatives in Iraq (probably because they just don't exist). Bush may be changing his "stay the course" mantra -- although this is most likely just superficial, without real changes -- but he only seems to be opening things up to abandon Iraq, not developing any successful strategy.

[placebo1969]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

Nice.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom 

Hmm... Where, exactly does he mention Abu Ghraib? Or where he says "some American solidiers." The facts are hard to deal with, I know. He CLEARLY isn't saying something about the asshats that tortured people in Abu Ghraib.

I said Abu Ghraib as an example, because I'm not familiar with what Kerry has said about "troops terrorizing" etc. I surmised that he was talking about Abu Ghraib OR the slaughter of the family OR whatever else has been in the news. The point of my question was that he wasn't accusing the entire armed forces, he was talking about certain, specific circumstances...of which, I do not know.

Do I think he was talking about EVERY soldier? Of course not. And I never said that.

Pardon, but weren't you just implying it? :

Hmm... Where, exactly does he mention Abu Ghraib? Or where he says "some American solidiers."

Nobody is asking him to kiss anyone's ass. Just come out and say that he's sorry!

What if he's not sorry? Should he apologize for having a lame delivery? You'll actually have to ask him, I don't know, but like I said I assume it's largely politics.

Maybe he's assuming that the soldiers in Iraq are intelligent enough to know that he wasn't referring to them and that they have more pressing matters to attend to anyway. Hmm?

[DLQ2006]

[QUOTE=selowitch;3188677][QUOTE]

I'll gladly concede that Kerry's choice of words was extremely poor and does not reflect what he really thinks.

I think he has made it quite clear over the past 30+ years what he really thinks and implying that those in the military are stupid is not the most hateful thing he has said.

Yes, these remarks definitely could be interpreted as an insult to the troops or a suggestion that they are not very intelligent or are there because they did not so well in school.

So what was the unbotched version of his "joke"?

Unfortunately, the country does not appear to consider competence when choosing a president. Instead, they prefer to focus on irrelevancies like what state he comes from, what accent he speaks with, and whether or not he is "good-looking".

Well it appears that they chose the most competent of the two in the last election. GW has degrees from IVY league colleges. Knows how to fly a jet, and can still land one on a carrier. Unless jet pilots are a bunch of idiots and those who don't get that are just too stupid to understand that. Yea, that must be it! Those that earn degrees in business from schools like Yale and Harvard.........idiots too. Gosh, when will people be smart enough to understand?

And good looking. Neither of those two are "good looking", but Kerry's face is too much for anybody to have to look directly at more than once. My God, he is fricking ugly.

The Kerry nobody saw during the campaign is the thoughtful, intelligent, gracious person that I know him to be. It simply doesn't come through on national television.

RLMAO...........So he meant to tell a 'Bush is a moron joke' that are all the rave at liberal Universities, and Kerry was too stupid himself to properly pull it off? Yea, I can see how such intelligence might not "come through on national television.

[marden]

Originally Posted by tie 

I think it is clear to everyone that we can't "stay the course" deeper and deeper into the pit. Everyone except Bush, that is.

Tell me what you have ever done or experienced that suggests you understand why we can or can't, should or shouldn't stay in Iraq until the Iraqis are able to ward off the Iranian jihadists who are trying to enslave them?

If you get your cues from the news you are one level removed from knowing the truth. If you get your news from liberal news sources you are another level removed from the truth. If you pay attention to opinion polls you are a thousand times removed from the reality of the situation in Iraq.

I think you are a thousand levels away from reality.

Here's the plan:

1. Help create a government

2. Help create a military/law enforcement and infrastructure to protect & support the people

3. Leave

Should a man leave his loved one unsatisfied just because he's tired?

Should a parent give up on teaching his child to walk because he thinks it's not going well?

Should the 15,000,000 people who risked life and limb to vote for their own freedom have their hopes and dreams killed because you have lost your will?

Read my sig. VVV

[BlueSky]

Ever notice how people LOVE taking offense when it benefits them to do so? Just sayin'.

[The Left]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

[marden]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

Ever notice how people LOVE taking offense when it benefits them to do so? Just sayin'.

He is the one who needs to be better educated. SOMEONE tell him to just STFU or say...

I AM SORRY

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...g6WRA&refer=us

Kerry Events Cut as Democrats Criticize Iraq Remark (Update1)
By Roger Runningen

Nov. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts canceled campaign appearances with Democratic congressional candidates after members of his own party criticized his remarks about the Iraq war and U.S. troops that he said were a ``botched joke'' directed at President George W. Bush.

Appearances by Kerry in support of candidates in three states were canceled after Democrats sought to distance themselves from his comments, which Bush and Republicans said were insulting to troops serving in Iraq.

Kerry, while campaigning in California Oct. 30 for gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides, said: ``Education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don't, you get stuck in Iraq.''

Bush said yesterday that Kerry's remarks were ``shameful'' and that he owed the troops an apology. Kerry said the comments were aimed at Bush, not the armed forces, and Republicans were feigning outrage over a poorly delivered joke. Kerry, who was the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate, called on Bush to apologize for misleading Americans over the war.

``If it was a botched joke, show me the punch line,'' White House Spokeswoman Dana Perino said today. ``The president saw the same remarks everyone else did.''

Democrats also have criticized Kerry's comments. Kerry won't appear today in Mankato, Minnesota on behalf of Tim Walz, a Democrat challenging Republican Representative Gil Gutknecht. The decision to cancel ``ultimately'' was Kerry's, said Walz spokeswoman Meredith Salsbery.

Iowa and Pennsylvania

Bruce Braley, a Democrat running for Iowa's 1st congressional seat, asked Kerry not to campaign with him tomorrow, the Quad-Cities Times reported. Braley thought Kerry's remarks were inappropriate, the paper said, citing Braley spokesman Jeff Giertz

Kerry also won't appear today in Philadelphia with U.S. Senate candidate Bob Casey, ABC News reported. Casey's race to unseat Republican Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania could be pivotal to Democrats' hopes to gain control of the Senate.

In Montana, Jon Tester, the Democratic challenger to incumbent Senator Republican Senator Conrad Burns, also sought to distance himself from Kerry.

``Senator Kerry's remarks were poorly worded and just plain stupid,'' Tester said in a statement late yesterday. ``He owes our troops and their families an apology.'' Bush is scheduled to campaign for Burns in Montana tomorrow.

Kerry's spokesman confirmed the senator has canceled the appearances.

``We made a decision not to allow the Republican hate machine to use Democratic House candidates as proxies in their distorted spin war in which once again they're willing to exploit brave American troops,'' David Wade said in a statement.

The Republican National Committee today rushed out a video clip headlined ``Kerry insults our troops'' with a replay of the senator's remarks.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by tie 

I think it is clear to everyone that we can't "stay the course" deeper and deeper into the pit. Everyone except Bush, that is.

And a significant number of American voters. Stay the course is a partisan talking point not unlike "cut and run". It's not enough to say; "stay the course, bad!". You have to be able to articulate what your plan is if not "stay the course".

I don't think Dems need to present a comprehensive plan or exit strategy.

Okay. Forget the fact that Dem strategists seem to agree with this stance- what if they want to actually win some seats this time?

Details of military strategy should be left to the experts, not voted on. And even if Dems won narrow majority in both houses, they couldn't set the military strategy anyway. They can, though, force a change in course.

To what direction? Should the voters simply not ask what direction then? Military strategy is already being left to the experts, so... what's your problem with that then? You're all over the place tie, with all due respect.

At the moment, neither party is offering good alternatives in Iraq (probably because they just don't exist). Bush may be changing his "stay the course" mantra -- although this is most likely just superficial, without real changes -- but he only seems to be opening things up to abandon Iraq, not developing any successful strategy.

Do you have absolutely anything at all to substantiate your claim that he is opening up things to abandon Iraq? Last I saw, troop numbers in Iraq are up from 147,000 to 150,000. This is the wrong direction for "opening up abandonment".

bye tie.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

I said Abu Ghraib as an example, because I'm not familiar with what Kerry has said about "troops terrorizing" etc. I surmised that he was talking about Abu Ghraib OR the slaughter of the family OR whatever else has been in the news. The point of my question was that he wasn't accusing the entire armed forces, he was talking about certain, specific circumstances...of which, I do not know.

But nobody was saying that he was accusing the entire armed forces. But it is up to HIM to tell us exactly what he is implying, else he leaves it up to us to infer. Correct?

He knows damn well that, with his history, people will assume when he says something like that, that he means not ALL soldiers, but at least a majority.

He's now accused nameless troops of rape, murder, terrorism, destroying cultures.

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

Pardon, but weren't you just implying it? :

Nope. You put words in my mouth by inferring it.

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

What if he's not sorry? Should he apologize for having a lame delivery? You'll actually have to ask him, I don't know, but like I said I assume it's largely politics.

Maybe he's assuming that the soldiers in Iraq are intelligent enough to know that he wasn't referring to them and that they have more pressing matters to attend to anyway. Hmm?

Fine, he doesn't have to say he's sorry if he isn't. But he can't run around saying that people are attacking him with his own words. Damn that Karl Rove.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by marden 

He is the one who needs to be better educated. SOMEONE tell him to just STFU or say...

I AM SORRY

OK. John, STFU or say you're sorry. This matter is now closed. John always listens to me.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

Ever notice how people LOVE taking offense when it benefits them to do so? Just sayin'.

You noticed?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom 

Damn that Karl Rove.

... and Harold Ford and Hillary Clinton and...

[marden]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

OK. John, STFU or say you're sorry. This matter is now closed.

Oh, don't leave now, BlueSky. The party wouldn't be the same without you!

[The Left]

well you know Karl Rove has to be behind this somehow.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom 

But nobody was saying that he was accusing the entire armed forces. But it is up to HIM to tell us exactly what he is implying, else he leaves it up to us to infer. Correct?

Incorrect. If certain major headlines and news cycles have indicated that certain US soldiers have been or may have been terrorizing civilians, and he makes those remarks, I don't think he's off the mark at all by not specificizing what he said. It's in the news, everyone knows what he's talking about and it doesn't take a wizard to know what he's talking about. Current events.

He knows damn well that, with his history, people will assume when he says something like that, that he means not ALL soldiers, but at least a majority.

Is THAT what that means? So now it's "at least a majority"? How you do infer, sir! I'm not going to even touch that.

He's now accused nameless troops of rape, murder, terrorism, destroying cultures.

Maybe he didn't have the names handy. And by the way, will it deal a fatal blow to your sense of patriotism and dedication to your country to find out that maybe...just maybe...it actually happened? Or would you prefer that the truth about that be buried forever? Would it be a bad thing if Kerry or anyone else brought to light that certain atrocities have occurred in Iraq by our soldiers? I'm asking because it appears to me that accusing a US soldier of atrocities is far worse for you than the actual atrocities having taken place. Correct me if I'm mistaken.