***kerry flip flops again and back Bush***

[Ronnie Raygun]

http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/381249|top|08-09-2004::17:46|reuters.html

Kerry: Still Would Have Approved Force for Iraq

Aug 9, 5:34 PM (ET)

By Patricia Wilson
GRAND CANYON, Ariz. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said on Monday he would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing force against Iraq even if he had known then no weapons of mass destruction would be found.

Taking up a challenge from President Bush, whom he will face in the Nov. 2 election, the Massachusetts senator said: "I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it is the right authority for a president to have but I would have used that authority effectively."

Speaking to reporters from the Powell's Landing on the rim of the Grand Canyon above a mile-deep drop, Kerry also said reducing U.S. troops in Iraq significantly by next August was "an appropriate goal."

"My goal, my diplomacy, my statesmanship is to get our troops reduced in number and I believe if you do the statesmanship properly, I believe if you do the kind of alliance building that is available to us, that it's appropriate to have a goal of reducing the troops over that period of time," he said.

On that timetable, Kerry's aim would be to pull out a large number of the 138,000 U.S. troops in Iraq in the first six months of his administration.

"Obviously, we'd have to see how events unfold," he added. "I intend to get more people involved in that effort and I'm convinced I can be more successful than President Bush in succeeding in doing that. It is an appropriate goal to have and I'm going to try to achieve it."

Kerry refused to say if he had any private assurances from Arab or European nations that they would help with security and reconstruction in Iraq but said "right now the administration ... is scrambling and struggling to try to find a way to do that."

"All of this should have happened in the beginning, all of these things should have been achieved beforehand," he said. "American presidents should not send American forces into war without a plan to win the peace."

BUSH CHALLENGE

Bush last week challenged Kerry, who Republicans accuse of flip-flopping on Iraq by voting for the war resolution and against the $87 billion request to fund operations, to say straight out if he would have voted the same way if only to eliminate the danger that Saddam Hussein could have developed weapons of mass destruction.

"Now, there are some questions that a commander-in-chief needs to answer with a clear yes or no," Bush said. "My opponent hasn't answered the question of whether knowing what we know now, he would have supported going into Iraq."

"I have given my answer," Bush said. "We did the right thing, and the world is better off for it."

Kerry challenged Bush to answer some questions of his own -- why he rushed to war without a plan for the peace, why he used faulty intelligence, why he misled Americans about how he would go to war and why he had not brought other countries to the table.

"There are four not hypothetical questions like the president's, real questions that matter to Americans and I hope you'll get the answers to those questions, because the American people deserve them," he told reporters.

Kerry, who is on day 11 of a two-week coast-to-coast campaign trip, used the majestic backdrop of the Grand Canyon to criticize Bush for neglecting America's national parks system and pledged to restore $600 million he said the president had cut from the budget.

[AChimp]

"I deeply resent the destruction of federalism represented by Hillary Clinton's willingness go into a state she doesn't even live in and pretend to represent people there, so I certainly wouldn't imitate it."
- Alan Keyes, March 17, 2000 on FOX News

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/05/thurs/

[ziggytrix]

interesting how kerry saying he stands by a decision is construed as a flip-flop. i suppose if he had said he would have voted differently knowing what he knows now, you wold have called that a flip-flop too.

so i guess really, your opinion can be accuratley predicited with the model if kerry does or says something, it must be a flip-flop. that's pretty asinine.

[Ant10708]

Ziggy: Kerry has said he wouldn't support the war if he knew there were no weapons of mass destruction. He has now "flip-flopped" from that stance to this new one that Edwards has been following for awhile.

Kerry does change his stance on many issues and I don't think that means hes a flip flopper necessarily. But I do think he constantly changes his stance on Iraq depending on which will give him more votes. Which all politicans are guilty of.

AChimp: Great quote. The irony of ti all makes me want to obey the monkey( not alan keyes).

[ScruU2wice]

Wow you don't seem to be racist at all Ant..

[ziggytrix]

ant> the resolution he voted for was not a declaration of war. it was an authorization of executive power. at any rate it doesn't really matter, as the issue is much more complicated than our reductionist media would ever dream of getting into.

it's so much easier to say "he flip-flopped" and the FOXS Newsfeed can continue to malnourish it's audience while they wave their flags, with blustering pride to cover their fear.

we're so fucked.

[Ant10708]

You like Oreilly thou? Or just the quote? His line of thinkign is more in line with conservatives obviously but from what I've seen of his television show, he is pretty fair with his guests. He seems to pick on Kerry alot more then Bush thou. But he did defend Kerry about that recent smear advertizement those veterans made about Kerry. Hes a commentator anyways so I guess how much he slants right isn't really that big of a deal since he doesnt give news.


I find Foxs news to def slant to the right but I also find NY times slants just as much to the left. Our media is all bullshit. Its probaly more dangerous to have TV biased then newspapers thou.

Is BBC relatively unbiased do you think? I normally get most of my news from their website and I have found it to be as unbiased as I can find. And also do you need satelite to receive their television news in America?

[ziggytrix]

i find the quote ironic, especially taken out of context.

i dunno anything about bbc tv, but their audio news is avaiable on most american public radio, and over broadband npr streams. as far as their bias, they have a definite british bias. :P

[ScruU2wice]

I wanna meet the genious minds who decided "flip flop" was the best term to describe decision changing.

[Ant10708]

It was probaly a collection of people like Ronnie. Or a retarded kid from pre-school

[ziggytrix]

actually, it'd be a collection of people who studied how best to manipulate people like ronnie, but that's just splitting hairs.

[Dole]

Is BBC relatively unbiased do you think? I normally get most of my news from their website and I have found it to be as unbiased as I can find.

Dont let abcdxxx see this! he will go into an apoplectic rage.

I would say they are fairly unbiased for a news agency, but then I work for them and I am a palestinian loving infidel anti-semite scum sucking pig.
GO ISRAEL! GO ISRAEL! THEY NEVER DONE NOTHING WRONG!

Incidentally, I am boycotting the subject matter at hand, as Ronnie's title makes no sense.

[ThisIsWitty]

BBC comes on one of those Public Broadcast stations. PBS, I think. At something like 6:00 or 6:30.