WHY JOHN KERRY OPPOSED FUNDING OUR TROOPS
One Question, Five Months, Many Answers,
Including One Really Confusing One
__________________________________________________ _____________

Sen. Kerry, You Voted Against $87 Billion To Provide Body Armor For Troops In Combat, Higher Combat Pay, And Better Health Care For Reservists And Their Families. Why?

March 16, 2004

“I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.” (Richard W. Stevenson and Adam Nagourney, “Bush’s Campaign Emphasizes Role Of Leader In War,” The New York Times, 3/17/04)


{HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! I couldn't stop laughing when I read that one!**




March 6, 2004

“‘That $87 billion has nothing to do with the preparatory money’ for such supplies, Kerry said in an interview with Fox News Channel.” (Patrick Healy, “In Swipe At Bush, Kerry Says Us Troops In Iraq Ill Prepared,” The Boston Globe, 3/7/04)

January 31, 2004
Kerry “wanted part of the money to come from rolling back GOP-backed tax cuts.” (Patrick Healy, “As Campaign Heats Up, Veterans Taking Sides,” The Boston Globe, 2/1/04)

January 16, 2004

“[T]he [vote] reflected his conviction that American troops would be more at risk if Congress paid for a reconstruction plan so ill-considered that it risked ‘leaving behind a failed state.’” (David E. Sanger, “Democrats Split On Security, But Agree In Faulting Bush,” The New York Times, 1/17/04)

October 26, 2003
“‘This president has done it wrong every step of the way,’ Kerry said. ‘He broke every promise and he’s done it wrong every step of the way. I’m not going to vote for him to continue to do it wrong.’” (Andrew Miga and David R. Guarino, “Iraq Viewpoint Dominates Dem Detroit Debate,” Boston Herald, 10/27/03)

October 25, 2003
Kerry “said he opposes Bush’s $87 billion spending request because of the administration’s failure to internationalize the reconstruction effort and ‘take the target off of American troops.’” (“The Democratic Presidential Candidates On The Issues At Sunday's Debate,” The Associated Press, 10/26/03)

October 23, 2003
“Now there’s a clear track record and a clearer set of very bad choices, and I’m voting against those choices.” (David M. Halbfinger, “Kerry Still Nagged By Questions On Vote To Authorize Iraq War,” The New York Times, 10/24/03)

October 17, 2003

Kerry Voted Against Senate Passage Of Iraq/Afghanistan Reconstruction Package. (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay)

“‘My vote is a clear statement, making it absolutely clear that this president has not pursued the best policy . . . to make our troops safe,’ Kerry said.” (Susan Milligan, “Among White House Hopefuls, It’s 3 Opposed, 2 In Favor,” The Boston Globe, 10/18/03)

October 16, 2003

“Presidential hopeful Sen. John F. Kerry said he opposed the funding because he believes Bush has not put forward an adequate plan to protect troops and bring in other nations to help and because the money comes at the expense of domestic priorities.” (Noelle Straub, “Kennedy Out To Kill Iraq Fund,” Boston Herald, 10/17/03)

http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=4020

Here's a good question....what exactly does Kerry stand for besides changing his stance on issues almost daily?

I love how the only person to respond to your pathetic mass-posting of anti-Kerry info is in this one too :D

You never cease to amaze me powerboss. You go hunting for anti-Kerry info, and ignore all the facts thrown right at you.

Just months ago Dean was your prey. Now, you've just moved on. Your credibility+your motives=your lack of replies.

I love how the only person to respond to your pathetic mass-posting of anti-Kerry info is in this one too

Why do you object to my postings of Kerry's statements?

What are you afraid of Volconvo?

Why won't you address the substance of the post?
It's pretty obvious.
What can you say?
Your candidate says whatever he thinks will get him a few votes at the time.

You never cease to amaze me powerboss. You go hunting for anti-Kerry info, and ignore all the facts thrown right at you.


Why do you object to me posting anti Kerry info?
Do you also object to Corporate Avengers Anti Bush info?

What facts am I ignoring?
The only ignoring I see here is your ignoring of the subject matter of this thread, and all the others, and you resorting to attacks on me.

Just months ago Dean was your prey. Now, you've just moved on. Your credibility+your motives=your lack of replies.

LOL. I think it has more to do with libs don't know how to respond to it. They know they've got a pretty weak candidate on their hands in Kerry, weaker than Dean or Edwards.
They've screwed up.

My motives are clear. I don't want to see Kerry elected. That is no secret.
If I were posting false information then there would be a problem with my credibility HOWEVER, I've not posted false information.

It's your credibility that is lacking in the fact that you cannot respond to Kerry's flip-flops and array of different statements on the same topic, over and over.

Why don't you start dealing in subject matter rather than focusing on me for a change?

Originally posted by Powerboss
Your candidate says whatever he thinks will get him a few votes at the time.

And yours doesn't? He's been exploiting September 11th, pushing for a gay marriage ban, appeasing the hispanic population by easing immigration law, and catering to the religious right. These all are cries for votes. And please don't give me your biased shpeal about how these things he's done are for different reasons-save it for someone who will nod their head.



Why do you object to me posting anti Kerry info?
Do you also object to Corporate Avengers Anti Bush info?
Because you post tons of it before we can reply, and you post very similar to the "corporate avengers anti bush info"-you provide a source that google pulled up for you, and hope it furthers your apparent bias. I can't debate with people like this.

What facts am I ignoring?
The only ignoring I see here is your ignoring of the subject matter of this thread, and all the others, and you resorting to attacks on me.[/quote

For all the anti-gay, anti-poor, anti-everything that spews out of your mouth..you sure come off as soft. STOP ATTACKING ME :o



[quote]LOL. I think it has more to do with libs don't know how to respond to it. They know they've got a pretty weak candidate on their hands in Kerry, weaker than Dean or Edwards.
They've screwed up.

That's your opinion, and of course you'll make up your own comforting thought about why your posts go ignored. I always wonder where people like you and contra are when things that legitimate news sources (even fox news) reveal.

My motives are clear. I don't want to see Kerry elected. That is no secret.
If I were posting false information then there would be a problem with my credibility HOWEVER, I've not posted false information.

No, your motive is that you don't want anyone who's on the other team to be re-elected. It all boils down to you fearing liberals.

It's your credibility that is lacking in the fact that you cannot respond to Kerry's flip-flops and array of different statements on the same topic, over and over.

You keep going on about "flip-flops". Perhaps you haven't seen the Bush we elected in 2000 vs. the one we have now. That is the very definition of flip flop. At least Kerry is a senator. I expect them to have to make comprimises to survive.

And yours doesn't? He's been exploiting september 11th, pushing for a gay marriage ban, appeasing the hispanic population by easing immigration law, and catering to the religious right. These all are cries for votes.


Bush seems to have one position and generally sticks to it.

Kerry, as seen above, has many, many, many positions.

Can you not comprehend this?

Because you post tons of it before we can reply, and you post very similar to the "corporate avengers anti bush info"-you provide a source that google pulled up for you, and hope it furthers your apparent bias. I can't debate with people like this.


I don't use Google for my Kerry info. There are a ton of Anti Kerry blogs out there to find all sorts of good information on him.

Why are you debating me? Why don't you stick to the topic?
What are you afraid of here Volconvo?
Stick to the subject of the thread please.

If you want to go on a tangent about me or anyone else, start a new thread.


For all the anti-gay, anti-poor, anti-everything that spews out of your mouth..you sure come off as soft. STOP ATTACKING ME

Why don't you deal with facts and debates rather than whining like a baby about me Volconvo?


That's your opinion, and of course you'll make up your own comforting thought about why your posts go ignored. I always wonder where people like you and contra are when things that legitimate news sources (even fox news) reveal.


Its pretty obvious why the libs ignore it Volconvo. What can they say? Kerry supporters don't really want to criticise their own candidate, it's almost impossible to respond to this in a way that reflects positively on Kerry.


What have "legitimate" news sources revealed that I've ignored?
I've got a lot of posts here at DA, I try to respond to as many threads as I can. What am I, or contra, ignoring?
Fill us in?
While you are at it, why don't you address the subject of the thread?


No, your motive is that you don't want anyone who's on the other team to be re-elected.

What?

It all boils down to you fearing liberals.

You are right. Liberals are dangerous to our survival and freedom.


You keep going on about "flip-flops". Perhaps you haven't seen the Bush we elected in 2000 vs. the one we have now. That is the very definition of flip flop. At least Kerry is a senator. I expect them to have to make comprimises to survive.

Wow. That was almost a response to the subject of the thread.
Congratulations!!!
It took you a while but you are making progress.

Why don't you start a thread about all the Bush flip-flops? I'll chime in when you do.

So you believe that it is OK for a Senator to make "comprimises" to survive, but not a President?
How is that? Why is it OK for one and not another?

Furthermore, how are the statements made by Kerry above, "comprimises"?
They seem like pretty clear responses to a simple question.

Do you BELIEVE in Kerry like you believed in Dean, Volco?? Does Kerry represent the "stand-up, go to hell establishment" view that you valued so highly in Dean's favorable days?

PB asserts that you (as a Dem, or a Lib) have found yourself with a weaker candidate on your hands than Dean or Edwards would have been. You respond with "That's your opinion".

Which horse are you riding, Volco? The one you believe in, or the one somebody else chose for you?



:p

^the one that someone else chose for me. I voted for edwards after realizing that Dean just couldn't convey his message correctly in this areana, but it didn't turn out for either of them.

Kerry showed broad appeal, and if that's what it takes to get the person out of office that is ignoring all of the social/economic issues that I value, then so be it.


Powerboss, I'm not going to respond to you. You came off as way too wanna-be condescending, and said something about liberals that makes it absolutely futile to debate with you (as I've already concluded).

I just find it funny that hardcore Bush supporters would criticize others for backing Kerry!! You're all being duped by the Republicrats..

Originally posted by Volconvo


Powerboss, I'm not going to respond to you. You came off as way too wanna-be condescending, and said something about liberals that makes it absolutely futile to debate with you (as I've already concluded).

Who has been rude and condescending here?

Read your initial post.

You start with the garbage talk and crap with me, expect to get it right back. And I'll win, Im better at it.


Perhaps you should just start responding to the subject matter of threads rather than be so obsessed about me.

better at garbage talk and crap? Yes, you do win, you are indeed better at spewing absolute garbage. :nice:

I think its clear that I'm better at dealing with the facts and suject matter as well Volconvo.

Thats OK. Im done with you for now. You've been owned.
Thanks for playing.

yes, you have a way with 'dealing' with facts. You ignore them :D

owned? what the hell are you? You're how old?... :nice:

Volconvo. Its pretty apparrant in this thread and an assortment of others who has avoided the facts.

You resort to red herrings and diversions, you rarely address the subject matter and whenever you do you turn it into a screed against either Bush or me. LOL.

Thanks again though. Your entertainment value here is priceless.