John Kerry is out of control, just like Howard Dean

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by gunkulator
Pretty big difference between that and proposing a humanitarian mission to a nation in anarchy.

I fail to see how you arrive at the conclusion that advocating the invasion of a sovereign country without international approval is any different in either of the two cases.

[Berzerker]

It's not what Kerry said, it's that he was the one who said it. Both these guys are crooked liars... So, for people who believe that voting for the evil of two lessers constitutes a valid endeavor, which of the two is a bigger lying crook? Then you can explain why voting for the evil of two lessers is moral...

[Dis]

I'm voting for Kerry. With a republican congress he can't do too much damage (same as Clinton not being able to **** up the U.S.). But a republican with a republican congress is just too dangerous. Just take a look at what's happening now.

[bipolarbear]

WOW! Politicians are corrupt lying scumbags. What's new?

[Ned]

Originally posted by bipolarbear
WOW! Politicians are corrupt lying scumbags. What's new?

Then, why is the ever-so-fragile Kerry upset?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by uh Clem
Not only did Kerry say all those horrible things, but he called Adam Clymer of the New York Times "a major-league a**hole."

Oh wait, sorry, that wasn't Kerry.

It was Cheney and the difference is that it was %100 accurate.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
In the absence of substance, we can only judge Kerry on style.

So far he hasn't shown much of that either.

Yea, the entire Democrat field was a disappointment this year. Like others I am also dismayed that there has been almost no discussion of any issues. I hope we see more coverage of Nader and the Libertarians, they have little to gain by simply being critical as their bases are so small to begin with. It would truly improve the "debate".

[uh Clem]

Originally posted by Sikander


It was Cheney and the difference is that it was %100 accurate.

Actually, it was Pretzel Boy; the Dick's contribution was to say, "Yeah, big time," or something like that.

And the "difference" has nothing to do with accuracy, as you know quite well. It's simply that you like Bush's poilitics and don't like Kerry's. Fair enough. But don't lie about it.



Republicans: love to dish it out. Can't take it.

[Capt Dizle]

John Kerry making up stuff out of whole cloth.

The Washington Times

Sen. John Kerry refuses to provide any information to support his assertion earlier this week that he has met with foreign leaders who beseeched him to prevail over President Bush in November's election.
The Massachusetts Democrat has made no official foreign trips since the start of last year, according to Senate records and his own published schedules. And an extensive review of Mr. Kerry's travel schedule domestically revealed only one opportunity for the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee to meet with foreign leaders here.
On Monday, Mr. Kerry told reporters in Florida that he'd met with foreign leaders who privately endorsed him.
"I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly," he said. "But, boy, they look at you and say: 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy.' Things like that."
Aides and supporters of Mr. Kerry have said providing names of the leaders or their countries would injure those nations' ongoing relations with the current Bush administration.
"In terms of who he's talked to, we're not going to discuss that," spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said yesterday. "I know it would be helpful, but we're not going into that. His counsels are kept private."
Mr. Kerry has made other claims during the campaign and then refused to back them up, including statements that Mr. Bush delayed the deal with Libya to give up its weapons of mass destruction program for political reasons.
Republicans have begun calling Mr. Kerry the "international man of mystery," and said his statements go even beyond those of former Vice President Al Gore, who was besieged by stories that he lied or exaggerated throughout the 2000 presidential campaign.
"I think it's beyond that level. The results of this week, I think he's going to have a very serious credibility problem with the American people," said Rep. Deborah Pryce, Ohio Republican and chairman of the House Republican Conference.
The Kerry campaign declined to say where or when Mr. Kerry met with foreign leaders and discussed his presidential campaign, which officially began Sept. 2 last year. They refused to give any hints about the leaders such as what region, what continent or even which hemisphere they're from. The Kerry aides also have refused to say how many foreign leaders privately have endorsed their boss.
According to travel records kept by the Secretary of the Senate, Mr. Kerry's last official trip abroad was in early 2002 when he visited the United Kingdom, Jordan, Egypt and Israel. The only other trip noted in Senate records since that time is an October 2002 domestic trip to Charleston, S.C., to appear on MSNBC's Hardball program.
The Washington Times also scoured White House, State Department and other public records for all official trips made to the United States by foreign leaders since the start of last year. During more than 30 such trips, Mr. Kerry was out of town campaigning, at home or in the hospital for a prostate-cancer operation, according to his travel schedules from this year and last.
The only instance found when Mr. Kerry was in the same town as a foreign leader was Sept. 24, when New Zealand Foreign Minister Philip Goff was in Washington meeting with State Department officials. On that day, according to his schedule, Mr. Kerry received the endorsement of the International Association of Fire Fighters in Washington.
Meanwhile, Mr. Bush was in New York meeting with the leaders of Germany, India, Pakistan, Ghana and Mozambique on that same day.
Pressed about the lack of evidence for any such meetings, Ms. Cutter said world leaders are weary of Mr. Bush's "go-it-alone" handling of the war in Iraq.
"After September 11, we had an enormous amount of good will from around the world for helping us seek out who was responsible" for the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, she said. "This administration quickly squandered that good will by pursuing a very arrogant foreign policy. It's time to rejoin the community of nations."
It may well be true that leaders are pulling for Mr. Kerry to win.
A survey of world opinion in 2003 for the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that in most countries, Mr. Bush ranked lower in popularity than Russian President Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, French President Jacques Chirac and British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Other presidential candidates also have been dogged by charges they were not truthful. In 1988, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., Delaware Democrat, withdrew from the presidential campaign after news reports that he had lifted whole passages from speeches by British Labor party leader Neil Kinnock.
Republicans said they are beginning to see a pattern in Mr. Kerry's remarks.
In a February meeting with the editorial board from the New York Daily News, Mr. Kerry said Mr. Bush, for political reasons, delayed closing the deal to have Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi surrender his weapons of mass destruction program.
"There's evidence that we could have had that deal some time ago," Mr. Kerry told the newspaper, saying he had heard "from friends in the British government that the deal was in a slow lock."
But the paper said Mr. Kerry refused to give specifics.
Then earlier this month, Mr. Kerry called for an investigation into whether the U.S. overthrew Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, telling NBC's "Today" show a "very close friend in Massachusetts" had talked with people who had made accusations that Mr. Aristide had been kidnapped.
"I don't know the truth of it. I really don't. But I think it needs to be explored, and we need to know the truth of what happened," Mr. Kerry said.
Republicans said Mr. Kerry's remarks remind them of former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark, who said — and later recanted — that he knew of a secret Pentagon memo listing the next countries after Iraq to be attacked in the war on terror.
In a speech to the Dupage County Lincoln Day dinner in Oak Brook, Ill., last night, Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie said Mr. Kerry has "a more vivid imagination than General Clark."
"Kerry's imaginary friends have British and French accents," Mr. Gillespie said.
Sen. George Allen, Virginia Republican and third-highest ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said such a political conversation occurring between a U.S. senator and the leader of a foreign country is hard to imagine.
"It would just be so inappropriate," he said. "I think it would be insulting."
Several foreign leaders denied having any such conversations with Mr. Kerry, including Mr. Schroeder, whose spokesman issued a denial.
And Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer told Australian radio this week that the remarks certainly didn't come from Australian leaders. He said it's not right either for leaders to make those comments or for a candidate to make them public.
"I think it's probably better to keep foreign leaders and the views of foreign leaders out of domestic elections, I mean, certainly we do that here in this country. I mean, people express different views to you, if you're a candidate, I tend not to pass on those kinds of views publicly," he said.
Even if Mr. Kerry's comments are true, several Republicans said, it's hardly something to brag about.
Republicans mocked Mr. Kerry after European newspapers reported that North Korea leader Kim Jong-il would prefer that Mr. Kerry win.
"Rather than dealing with President George W. Bush and hawkish officials in his administration, Pyongyang seems to hope victory for the Democratic candidate on November 2 would lead to a softening in U.S. policy towards the country's nuclear-weapons program" according to London's Financial Times, which said that Mr. Kerry's speeches are being broadcast on Radio Pyongyang and reported in "glowing" terms.
"The mullahs in Iran probably don't care to have Bush in there because he won't suffer terrorists or the country's that harbor them," said Mr. Allen. "I want a president who cares about what's right rather than the U.N. protocols."
And a poll taken by Andres McKenna Polling and Research found that Americans overwhelmingly believe "the terrorists would prefer" Mr. Kerry to win the election.
The poll of 800 registered voters, taken in February, showed 60 percent thought terrorists would be happier with Mr. Kerry, while just 25 percent said the terrorists would prefer Mr. Bush.
Said Ms. Cutter: "I don't care what the Republicans are saying. The story here is the good will squandered by the Bush administration."

[DanS]

I hope this isn't Kerry's version of the "Straight Talk Express"?

[GePap]

You guys still babling among yourselves about this?

Sad, real sad.....

[DinoDoc]

And yet you keep coming back.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
And yet you keep coming back.

I like mocking you

[Ned]

I agree with the observation that it would be highly inappropriate for a foreign leader to make any comment on preferences of whom they would prefer elected. If they were made privately to Kerry, it demonstrates that he cannot keep confidences.

[Capt Dizle]

I do not think it appropriate for a presidential candidate to conduct foreign policy before he is in the White House. It undermines the presidency, our official foreign policy and the whole country. But Reagan did this, it is not a liberal or democratic thing.

I just think Kerry is making stuff up as he goes.