Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Kerry's Turn 37

Journal by pudge

I've mostly defended Kerry from Bush's campaign attacks recently, so now it's time to turn it around a little.

I like John Kerry as a person, despite my disagreements with his politics, but I've always hated him when he is in campaign mode, when he embodies everything I hate about politicians and their partisan battles. He will say anything, no matter how obviously contradictory. He will manipulate and dissemble and lie through his teeth.

Case 1

This weekend, he offered an absolutely perfect example. He was at a pro-choice rally, and said that President Bush is unfit for office because he doesn't understand that "women's rights are just that -- rights -- not political weapons to be used by politicians in this nation." He asks everyone listening to forget that he is a politician, in this nation, using women's rights as a political weapon, while he condemns his opponent for supposedly doing the same thing. And also to forget that Bush and his campaign really haven't spent much time talking about abortion to begin with; Kerry uses women's rights as a political weapon a lot more than Bush does.

It's classic Kerry: take a point that is either minor, or completely made up, attack your opponent for it, pretend you don't do the same thing, and then feign innocence when attacked for it. Then, use their "unwarranted" counterattack on you as justification for even more aggressive attacks.

Case 2

Don't understand what I mean? Turn your attention to the battles over military service. Right now, Kerry and his people are complaining that Bush's campaign is attacking his military service. The problem is that it is not really true, and to the limited extent it is true, Kerry did the exact same thing to Bush in February.

Basically, the RNC and some others close to the Bush campaign said Kerry should answer the questions about his service, and release his records. So, Kerry says Bush is questioning his military service. But if so, then Kerry questioned Bush's, too:

"It's not up to me to talk about them or to question them at this point," Kerry said of the accusations. "I don't even know what the facts are. But I think it's up to the president and the military to answer those questions."

That is all that the RNC did, that is the furthest the Bush campaign went. Some say, well, it wasn't the Bush campaign or RNC, it was talk radio, and other Republicans in Congress. Yes, and three months ago, it was the web sites and Democrats in Congress, not to mention the head of the DNC, who said Bush was AWOL. Again, the Democrats did it all first, and then whine when hit back in the exact same way.

And now Kerry is using the Bush counterattack on him as justification for direct attacks on Bush's military service. That's right, let it sink in: Kerry attacks Bush, Bush later attacks Kerry in the same way, and Kerry uses that to justify increased attacks on Bush. Machiavelli would be proud.

Case 3

This even extends to far less emotional issues. Kerry plans to help the economy and jobs by giving all American corporations a 5 percent tax cut.

Are you kidding me? Since when has Kerry been a supply-sider? Since when has Kerry not attacked supply-side economics?

Since the campaign began, of course.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kerry's Turn More

Kerry's Turn

Comments Filter:
  • Yesterday a good friend of mine and I went out for lunch and talked mostly about Kerry vs. Bush (he is very republican, so the conversation was pretty one-sided).
    When Kerry first started running I actually felt a little guilt (him being a democrat and all) for liking the guy, but the more I hear him spout off his liberal views and his doublespeak and outright lies (Kerry you are a senator, we have your voting record), the more I really dislike him (bordering on hatred).

    He said in 2002 that he beleives
    • Partisan much?

      he calls Bush a "criminal" for invading

      Technically this invasion of Iraq was in contradiction to the UN charter and a number of treaties. Thus, Bush is, by some definitions of the label, a criminal.

      Then again, so is Kerry, by his own admission.

      I beleive there are chemical weapons still hidden.

      Oh come on now. If they did exist(and that's pretty much a leap of faith at this point), they're over the borders by now. Which would be far worse than where they were before.

      it took 40 year
      • Partisan much?
        a little :-)

        Oh come on now. If they did exist(and that's pretty much a leap of faith at this point), they're over the borders by now. Which would be far worse than where they were before.

        true, but there were very public reports of refridgerated trucks leaving the main chemical plant in baghdad (the one on the tigris whose name eludes me for the moment). While not exactly a smoking gun, it is a bit strange, don't you think?

        The Lusitania was SUNK below 310 feet of water before anyone c
        • While not exactly a smoking gun, it is a bit strange, don't you think?

          There are a lot of strange things about this war, and a lot of smoke and mirrors as well. Yes, it strikes me as strange, but I hope that weapons did not get out, as that would've been counter to one of the reasons for invading.

          Bush was hoping that after Saddam was captured the people who worked in the plants might give some idea as to where they were. I doubt that. I think Saddam would have put people who were supporters of his regim

    • (Kerry you are a senator, we have your voting record), the more I really dislike him (bordering on hatred).

      Why, then, should we listen to anything you have to say?

      He said in 2002 that he beleives Saddam is re-arming, now he calls Bush a "criminal" for invading and "not giving diplomacy a chance" Hello? where have you been for the last 12 years? diplomacy? how about we stop shooting at you, and you leave kuwait and don't re-arm yourselves, how about we help your people during the embargo ith the food

      • But at no point after the first Gulf War was Saddam a threat to the United States. Saddam committed only one act of terrorism against the United States -- the attempted assassination of the former President Bush

        Your second sentence flatly contradicts the first.

        However, even if you meant "But at no point except for the following case," it is incorrect, as evidenced by the multiple UN resolutions -- including 1441 in November 2002 which said in no uncertain terms that he WAS a threat to the security and st

        • "But at no point after the first Gulf War was Saddam a threat to the United States. Saddam committed only one act of terrorism against the United States -- the attempted assassination of the former President Bush."

          Your second sentence flatly contradicts the first.

          How is an assassination attempt against a former president a threat to the existence of the United States? Are you saying that this was justification for a war?

          However, even if you meant "But at no point except for the following case," it i

          • How is an assassination attempt against a former president a threat to the existence of the United States? Are you saying that this was justification for a war?

            The initial quote never mentioned "existence." Threats are not only about existence. And yes, of course it is justification. It's not the one used in this case, however.

            UN resolutions do not constitute proof.

            Correct, but they do -- according to the members of the UN -- establish legal fact. In this case, I happen to agree with the UN's find
      • Why, then, should we listen to anything you have to say?

        because my points are valid. :-)

        This has somehow turned way off topic from pudges original post, so this will be the last thing I say (if you want the last work just hit reply and you got it ;-).

        But at no point after the first Gulf War was Saddam a threat to the United States

        perhaps not directly, but we left him in a position to be a threat to his own people. Bush (version 1) encouraged the Iraqi people (mostly the Shia) to revolt, which th
  • Kerry is a politician, through and through.

    Still looking for an alternative... Is Bugs Bunny running?
  • I recall an article in the Sacbee during the primaries. It was quite critical of the primary and Kerry in particular. The single line I recall went something like "There's a candidate every issue -- and that is John Kerry".

    "Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others." -- John Kerry (or was that Groucho Marx?)

    I'm really disappointed with the direction the campaign is going. The sanctimony from the democrats is inane. The whitehouse/RNC/Bush et al. said nothing during the primary whe
  • > "women's rights are just that -- rights -- not political weapons to be used by politicians in this nation."

    This statement is meaningless: his statement attacks himself! He's using women's rights to smear Bush.

    > He asks everyone listening to forget that he is a politician

    Yeah. He wants everyone to forget about him on election day too, right? HAHA!

    > It's classic Kerry: take a point that is either minor, or completely made up, attack your opponent for it, pretend you don't do the same thing

Slashdot Top Deals

Comparing information and knowledge is like asking whether the fatness of a pig is more or less green than the designated hitter rule." -- David Guaspari

Close