|
SwiftVets.com Service to Country
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DerbyRed Seaman Recruit
Joined: 29 Aug 2004 Posts: 20 Location: Hope Mills, NC
|
Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 8:26 pm Post subject: When He Was For It (B4 He Was Against It) - Bill Kristol |
|
|
I can’t handle the “Alphabets”, so I missed seeing this interview @ GMA this morning, but from what I get from Rush and Hannity et al, Diane Sawyer had jfk spinning on himself. The cuts I’ve heard are at once funny and sad. But here’s one of the things that came out of it is played out below . . .
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/700yvdar.asp
When Was He For It (Before He Was Against It)?
John Kerry gives a disingenuous defense of why he said voted for the $87 billion before he voted against it.
by William Kristol
09/29/2004 1:20:00 PM
ON TODAY'S Good Morning America, John Kerry defended his "I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it," comment: "It just was a very inarticulate way of saying something, and I had one of those inarticulate moments late in the evening when I was dead tired in the primaries and I didn't say something very clearly."
The problem: According to the March 17 Washington Post, Kerry made the comment at a noontime appearance at Marshall University, two weeks after the Democratic primary contest had ended.
The irony: The Bush campaign had already done all the damage it could with this particular comment of Kerry's. Kerry's inability simply to smile about his inept formulation and move on, and his attempt instead to offer a (false) excuse, is perhaps more telling than the original statement.
William Kristol is editor of The Weekly Standard.
I just don’t get it. Time after time it has been shown how casually -- and prolifically -- jfk puts out these whoppers and it somehow escapes a great number of Americans he was equally as apt to do the same thing 35 years ago > > > GBA/cul/dmm _________________ "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams " |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DerbyRed Seaman Recruit
Joined: 29 Aug 2004 Posts: 20 Location: Hope Mills, NC
|
Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 9:32 pm Post subject: jfk @ GMA -- 29 Sep 04 |
|
|
Here’s the other one I’d been looking for . . . found it on ABC’s “The Note” -- and Mark Halperin et al aren’t happy with his implosion under pressure from Diane Sawyer . . . they’re downright suicidal about his chances with Dubya (I don’t blame ‘em) > > > GBA/cul/dmm
DIANE SAWYER: Was the war in Iraq worth it?
JOHN KERRY: We should not have gone to war knowing the information that we know today. [WHAAAAAT????? I’d probably understand this if they were talking about the dems’ reflecting on voting results in the primaries. But OIF?? C’mon -- is he saying that he’s a fortune teller as well as a combat hero?!!?]
DS: So it was not worth it.
JK: We should not — it depends on the outcome ultimately — and that depends on the leadership. And we need better leadership to get the job done successfully, but I would not have gone to war knowing that there was no imminent threat — there were no weapons of mass destruction — there was no connection of Al Qaeda — to Saddam Hussein! The president misled the American people — plain and simple. Bottom line.
DS: So if it turns out okay, it was worth it?
JK: No.
DS: But right now it wasn't [ … ? … ]--
JK: It was a mistake to do what he did, but we have to succeed now that we've done what he's — I mean look — we have to succeed. But was it worth — as you asked the question — $200 billion and taking the focus off of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda? That's the question. The test of the presidency was whether or not you should have gone to war to get rid of him. I think, had the inspectors continued, had we done other things — there were plenty of ways to keep the pressure on Saddam Hussein.
DS: But no way to get rid of him.
JK: Oh, sure there were. Oh, yes there were. Absolutely.
DS: So you're saying that today, even if Saddam Hussein were in power today it would be a better thing — you would prefer that . . .
JK: No, I would not prefer that. And Diane — don't twist here. [The only one “twisting” was jfk . . . in the wind!!!] _________________ "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams " |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|