Kerry Disappoints, Yet Again


h1 Posted 4 years, 3 months ago in the early evening by moreno

this wasnt even hard to find:

“Responding to President Bush’s question with several of his own, Sen. John Kerry said Monday he would have voted to authorize the war in Iraq knowing what he does now, but added that he would have used the power more effectively than the current commander in chief”

quedate en la naturaleza, oso.



6 comments | Feed for comments | Trackback URL

  1. 1seydNo Gravatar from United States says:

    Just remember this time we’re just going for the lesser of the two evils… Sadly, that’s the world we live in…

  2. 2JoshNo Gravatar from United States says:

    Even though many people correctly saw that by giving the president the authority to go to war he would use that authority no matter what the U.N. or our allies thought, on the surface John Kerry’s comments don’t commit him to supporting how the president decided to go to war, how the war and aftermath were waged. He said he thought it right to give the president leverage to put the weapons inspectors back into Iraq. And given Saddham’s use of those weapons in the past, making sure he didn’t have them by putting the inspectors back on the ground doesn’t seem to be something Kerry should be ashamed about or disown. There is nuance to his position. Taking away the nuance, believing there is simple answers, the Iraq war is bad, I’m against it and everything about it is more akin to the simplistic logic of our slightly retarded president.

  3. 3JoshNo Gravatar from United States says:

    And I’m using retarded comedically. I don’t think he’s retarded or that retarded is a good word to ever use, perhaps monkey brained would be better.

  4. 4el morenoNo Gravatar from United States says:

    josh you know thats bullshit. he specifically said he wouldve gone to war, not only the weapons inspectors bullshit. he wouldve voted for the war even if he knew there wasnt any wmd’s or al-qaeda links. just because hes a demycrat doesnt mean you gotta run to his defense…thats what rob reiner is for.

  5. 5osoNo Gravatar from United States says:

    I agree with Seyd. And, as I’ve said a million times, with Naomi Klein.

  6. 6JoshNo Gravatar from United States says:

    An editorial in the Daily News makes the same point I was trying to make, that Kerry’s comments don’t commit him to saying he would have waged a war with Iraq but by granting the authority to wage war he was putting pressure on the UN to weapons inspectors back in. Again, I think a noble effort:

    Asked whether he would have voted to give President Bush the okay for war had he known that Saddam Hussein had no WMD, Kerry on Monday responded, “Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a President to have.”

    Now, Kerry surely has the intellectual dexterity to reconcile his two positions. He could say, for example, that he would have voted to give the President war authority only in the expectation that Bush would have used it to build an international coalition. But why inflict such mental gymnastics on the public when all anyone wants is the answer to a question central to the election: Do you, Mr. Kerry, believe the U.S. was right to invade Iraq, WMD or no WMD?

    Maybe he should be more clear in his answer to that question but I don’t think he’s ever specifically said he would have waged war in Iraq no matter what. But if you have that quote somewhere then I’ll gladly admit I’m wrong.



Share Your Comments


h1