NationStates Jolt Archive

Yes, I know the source is a bit suspect. Yes, I know there will be a number of leftists who not only will flame me on this, but who will flame me without having even viewed the video clips on this link. Yes, I know there are those on here who have nothing better to do with their time than follow me from thread to thread ranting about my views. But these video clips are actual clips of Kerry contradicting himself:

http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/100104v1.wmv

View it only if you have the guts.

Yes, I know the source is a bit suspect. Yes, I know there will be a number of leftists who not only will flame me on this, but who will flame me without having even viewed the video clips on this link. Yes, I know there are those on here who have nothing better to do with their time than follow me from thread to thread ranting about my views. But these video clips are actual clips of Kerry contradicting himself:

http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/100104v1.wmv

View it only if you have the guts.

doesn't load for me... :/

Actually if you read the transcript very closely of the debates GW actually said in as many words that flip-flops are normal and are ok. Which made my husband and I laugh quite a bit. However, Bush gave more disinformation in the debate then Kerry did. Both gave some wrong information, however Bush won the misinformation test in the fact check.

Bush does too. It's part of a politicians job description it seems.

more my ass, you couldnt prove the first one, stop being a lame republican version of MKULTRA

Out of interest Eutrusca, are you still pretending to be that old guy on that website you posted?

Just a small correction since I am not gonna bother defending Kerry on everything "flip flop" or not:

Bush's colossal error of judgement was to go it unilaterally, to abandon diplomacy and play the hardass cowboy in the international arena, alienating allies and NOT using war as *the last resort*.

Hussein is gone, whether or not the Iraqis are better off in the longterm remains to be seen. Currently Iraq is a terrorism hotbed and barely anything resembling democracy. At least in this regard, Hussein was better. At least then it was an Iraqi killing Iraqis, although I agree that Hussein was not an angel, he's not the only dictator in the world nor the worst nor was he any danger at the time of decision to start this war.

Out of interest Eutrusca, are you still pretending to be that old guy on that website you posted?

( shrug ) I have no other option. That's really who I am. :)

Yes, I know the source is a bit suspect. Yes, I know there will be a number of leftists who not only will flame me on this, but who will flame me without having even viewed the video clips on this link. Yes, I know there are those on here who have nothing better to do with their time than follow me from thread to thread ranting about my views. But these video clips are actual clips of Kerry contradicting himself:

http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/100104v1.wmv

View it only if you have the guts.

Nice clip. Another thing that has puzzled me is why does Kerry think we should have given nuclear fuel to Iran. I mean is it really hard to figure out what they would have done with it. Afterall, they do have some huge oil deposits, so I don't think they really need to use nuclear power. He said it worked in N. Korea, but then they were lying to us during the Clinton era. I don't really want a president who would give fuel which could be easily enriched into weapons grade material, to our enemies.

( shrug ) I have no other option. That's really who I am. :)

You know, you could put an end to the speculation of if this is you or not. It's easy. Post a banner and link to Nationstates on your site included in your links. Even if for only 24 hours so it can be proven, otherwise I'm afraid there will remain doubts.

Nice clip. Another thing that has puzzled me is why does Kerry think we should have given nuclear fuel to Iran. I mean is it really hard to figure out what they would have done with it. Afterall, they do have some huge oil deposits, so I don't think they really need to use nuclear power. He said it worked in N. Korea, but then they were lying to us during the Clinton era. I don't really want a president who would give fuel which could be easily enriched into weapons grade material, to our enemies.

Good point, Moe, and one I hadn't considered.

You know, you could put an end to the speculation of if this is you or not. It's easy. Post a banner and link to Nationstates on your site included in your links. Even if for only 24 hours so it can be proven, otherwise I'm afraid there will remain doubts.

Good idea, Steph! I'll do that today! :)

Where's the best place to get one???

Here's another idea: Post some more pics of 'you', other than just the one THAT site. ;)

You know, you could put an end to the speculation of if this is you or not. It's easy. Post a banner and link to Nationstates on your site included in your links. Even if for only 24 hours so it can be proven, otherwise I'm afraid there will remain doubts.

It's up ...

http://paradigmassociates.org/ParadigmFLH.html

I just used the banner at the top of this page, with a few minor modifications, and linked it to the page on NationStates which shows the information on Eutrusca.

Here's another idea: Post some more pics of 'you', other than just the one THAT site. ;)

You can see more pictures of me than you ever wanted to see by going to my family's site at ...

http://www.geocities.com/fhornsr/index.html

This site is linked to from my personal page on the PA site, so I didn't think it would be necessary for me to post this one.

Bush is right, Kerry could debate himself

Bush is right...

Did you really just say that?

Did you really just say that?

Unless I've somehow forgotten how to read, yes he did. Why? You sound somewhat ... incredulous. :)

Hm...
Flip-flop #1: No flip-flop present, that I can tell. First he says that he won't veto something that would increase American security, then he says that you've got to work through the UN and global community on issues like these. That's two different, albeit related, subjects.

Flip-flop #2: Again, not a flip-flop. In the first clip, he says the removal of Hussein was Bush's primary reason for war in Iraq. In the second, he (seems to--it is taken heavily out of context in the middle of a sentance, so it is difficult to tell) talks about what, in his opinion, made Hussein dangerous. As a side not to this, there is a thesis paper online (I've linked to it before) that followed the Bush administration's words carefully--between Sept. 11 and the date of the invasion of Iraq, no less than 27 separate reasons were given by the administration as "The Reason" for invasion. THAT'S a flip-flop.

Flip-flop #3: Did you even watch the debate? They talked about this quote a lot. The "collosal error of judgement" was in HOW Bush deposed Saddam, not in that he did so. That's always been Kerry's stance; if I'm remembering the quote right, it was "Saddam Hussein posed a threat, and there was a right way and a wrong way to remove him from power. The President chose the wrong way." No flip-flop here.

Flip-flop #4: This is pretty simple logic; he beleives that we have to do whatever it takes to succeed in Iraq now that we're there. That includes more money. However, going INTO Iraq in the first place like we did (what he thinks was the wrong idea) cut off our ability to use those funds for other things. No flip-flop.

Flip-flop #5: There were two versions of that bill. They both included the ammunition/body armor questions. He voted for the first one. The second one (the republican version, as I recall) had too many changes that he didn't like. That's not a flip-flop, it's doing your research on what you're voting on. That's his JOB. In the second clip, he seems to be saying that he thinks the first version of the bill will pass.


Flip-flop #6: Once again, no flip-flop. The invasion itself (on the premise of WMD) was a mistake. However, the war we find ourselves embroiled in is not; it's become a war to secure and liberate Iraq. He believes that, though it started on a bad template, the war must be won, because it's now vital to everybody's interests (excepting the terrorists who are trying to take advantage of the current power vaccuum and chaos).

Flip-flop #7: First, you have to ASSUME that the second clip is even relevant to the subject; we don't get to hear what question Kerry is responding to (very out of context). Next, Kerry is saying the same thing in both of these clips. He's saying that, given all the correct info beforehand, he would have done things differently than Bush did. No flip-flops, only one very steady position described two ways.

Flip-flop #8: He says he respects the troops from other nations in the "coalition." That can be done while admitting that they're not doing much, compared to our troops. That's just realism. No flip-flop.

Flip-flop #9: No flip-flop here, either. He said Saddam was a threat. He DIDN'T say Saddam was an immanent threat, nor did he say he was a threat to us.

Flip-flop #10: This is the closest one to actually being a flip-flop, but still misses the mark. He says that Saddam needed to be disarmed--completely. As in, deposed. The other clips are, first, him saying that Bush needed to give more time to the inspectors to really find out if there were WMD (seems like, anyway. again, very out of context), and then him admitting that he really didn't know weather there were WMD or not. The second two clips compliment one another, and the first one is talking in a different sense.

It amuses and frightens me that people manage to convince themselves to such a great degree that Kerry does naught but flip-flop, when really the man is holding a remarkably steady position. But then, that's the "liberal media" for you.

Hm...It amuses and frightens me that people manage to convince themselves to such a great degree that Kerry does naught but flip-flop, when really the man is holding a remarkably steady position. But then, that's the "liberal media" for you.

None so blind as those who will not see.

What, no comment on the bulk of my message? I suppose simple logic IS a bit hard to argue against...

Look, I'm no huge fan of Kerry. I'm only voting for him to try and oust Bush. But I do follow things with a decent eye for detail. Those things that he's been called a flip-flopper on, were either:
1. Nuanced differences in statements that actually compliment each other, or
2. Statements that he made with a gap of years between the clips.

I find nothing wrong with someone changing his mind over the course of several years. Do you?

I find nothing wrong with someone changing his mind over the course of several years. Do you?
I find it funny that right-wingers attack Kerry for "waffling" over the course of many years, and even when he decides that he made a mistake and wants to undo it, yet they don't attack Bush for changing the reason of invasion of Iraq.

I find it funny that right-wingers attack Kerry for "waffling" over the course of many years, and even when he decides that he made a mistake and wants to undo it, yet they don't attack Bush for changing the reason of invasion of Iraq.

Exactly

Also, when ever I see videos like this, they seem to cut Kerry in the middle of his sentences.

Exactly

Also, when ever I see videos like this, they seem to cut Kerry in the middle of his sentences.
Which is one of the devices used. Take any idea you've spoken about in a conversation you've had, and put it out of context. It'll make about as much coherent sense as any "flip-flops" that Kerry has been accused of.