Journal pudge's Journal: More on Lies 13
I forgot one of the big lies: that Kerry voted against funding the troops. I've mentioned this one, in this space, a bunch of times. The fact is that Kerry only voted against funding the troops because he didn't like HOW it was funded, and he never would have disallowed, through his vote, the funding of the troops. If he had been successful in stopping the bill, then the bill would have changed to suit his desires, to get him to approve it. He made this very clear at the time, on Face the Nation, and in other places. And yet Bush is still out there saying Kerry flip-flopped by voting for the war, and against the funding of the troops.
Again: any implication that Kerry was against the funding of the troops is false. He voted only against one way to fund the troops, and would not have allowed them to remain unfunded.
Strangely, as I say that, I am also condemning Kerry. He is now trying to frame his vote against ther $87B as though it was a vote against the war itself. Now, it's a smart move: he was losing the battle to convince people he was trying to fund the war, so he embraced it instead, and spun it to his favor, as though he had actually been against the funding, saying the other day in Boston (as part of the reason he voted against the bill): "The United States of America should never go to war because we want to; we only go to war because we have to." More deceptions. More lies.
But how do you know? (Score:1)
You say: "Again: any implication that Kerry was against the funding of the troops is false. He voted only against one way to fund the troops, and would not have allowed them to remain unfunded."
But how do you know? Just because Kerry said so on a news show? Who is to say that Kerry didn't know exactly what he was doing by playing the mi
Re:But how do you know? (Score:2)
Because he actually did push for an alternative funding bill on the floor of the Senate. He stood up on the floor of the Senate and said so. Maybe he was lying then, but I am holding him to his words at the time
I don't buy it (Score:2)
That's fine when you're a #2 Senator. But if you're going to be president, I expect more leadership and more success in shaping legislation, not just casting meaningless votes for or against your (supposed) underlying position.
I don't buy into
Voting contradictions? Perhaps. (Score:2)
Re:Voting contradictions? Perhaps. (Score:2)
Re:Voting contradictions? Perhaps. (Score:1)
spun? (Score:2)
I Googled that phrase quickly and couldn't find where he had claimed it was a reason for his vote against the $87 billion. It's quoted in a snippet frequently, so maybe you're looking at a speech I'm not. But h
Re:spun? (Score:2)
It was on NewsHour last night, from a speech Monday. Listen to the RealAudio [pbs.org]. Kerry starts talking at about 4:18. He says the quote at about 6m, and also says at around 5m, "You better be able to say to them, 'I tried to do everything in my power to avoid the loss of your son and daughter'
On Kerry cutting Intelligence funds. Pot...Kettle? (Score:2)
----------
The 1994 proposal to cut Intelligence Funds, which can be read here [factcheck.org]
(about page 5), was for $1 billion over 1994-1998. In 1995, Kerry made
a different proposal to cut $1.5 billion over five years. Not per year,
mind you... over five years, putting his proposed intelligence
cuts at $300 million. In comparison to the $27 billion being spent on
Intellligence at the time, this means tha
Re:On Kerry cutting Intelligence funds. Pot...Kett (Score:2)
More readings... (Score:2)
Shameless in Iraq [thenation.com].
Interesting bits...
nice... (Score:1)
Re:nice... (Score:2)
The latter does not necessarily preclude the former.