From last Dec 16th
On December 16, at Drake University in Iowa, Kerry asserted that "those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president."
From August 9, 2004
Speaking in Arizona on Monday, Kerry declared that "even knowing what we now know," he would still have cast his vote in the Senate to authorize the Bush administration to invade Iraq. "I would have voted for the authority," said Kerry. "I believe it was the right authority for the president to have."
From yesterday:
"Staking out new ground on Iraq, Sen. John Kerry said Monday he would not have overthrown Saddam Hussein had he been in the White House, and he accused President Bush of "stubborn incompetence," dishonesty and colossal failures of judgment. Bush said Kerry was flip-flopping.
"Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who deserves his own special place in hell," he added. "But that was not, in itself, a reason to go to war. The satisfaction we take in his downfall does not hide this fact: We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure."
So, what is his stand on Iraq? Will it be the same in a week or two?
Or, as this guy points out:
Listen to John Kerry on a day-to-day basis. Do you hear much of anything other than criticism? We know all about what John Kerry is against--it seems to be whatever President Bush is for--but do we really know much of anything about any of Kerry's plans?
So, what would Kerry do in the White House? Without an opposing candidate to calibrate himself against, how would Kerry determine what he believes? What are his default positions? Well, he shares a state (and staff) with Ted Kennedy, and his Senate votes reflect that. Perhaps that's why Kerry talks more about four months in Vietnam than two decades in the U.S. Senate.
Want an idea what four years of a Kerry presidency would be like? Just look to his campaign today. The Kerrys apparently believe that people who disagree with them are idiots. (In all fairness, only Teresa actually said that, but watching John Kerry all these months, I'm not convinced he disagrees.)
And if we voters are idiots, it relieves John Kerry of the burden of articulating his plans, if any. We simply wouldn't get the nuance. But if we can't decipher Kerry's plans, neither can al Qaeda. Therein may lie the true strategic brilliance of John Kerry: after four years of Kerry in the White House, Osama bin Laden will be so damn confused, he just might forget who his enemy is.
Current Events » in reply to I would contend you haven't read and just parrot the RNC line.
Your grip on reality is quite shaky
The whole thread (15 posts)
- Does anyone know what Kerry's position is or has been concerning taxing the internet???
- Same as Kerry's position on everything: "Yes and No" (n/t)
- Just in case it was a serious question
- While Kerry has been on both sides of the issue, he always seems to come down ultimately on tax increases. (n/t)
- It's hard to figure out Kerry's position at any time on any subject
