NationStates Jolt Archive


Let's say you are the President

J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 02:57
and you recieve a memo that reads; "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

What do you do?
Chess Squares
19-10-2004, 02:58
if im bush? go play cowboy on my ranch
Chikyota
19-10-2004, 03:00
Panic. Eat a pretzle. Pass out.
Stephistan
19-10-2004, 03:01
Read "My Pet Goat" oh, sorry, that's what he did while the USA was being attacked, my bad.
Hierosolyma
19-10-2004, 03:02
Is that all the information we get? That's pretty vague, there's no real information. What sources gave this information? Do we know where or when they are determined to strike? Do we know which specific people are planning the attack?

I guess my first action would be to get more information.
New Granada
19-10-2004, 03:02
If i were a good president I would throw an absolute fit and order the intelligence services to concentrate their energies fully on determining what kind of strike and where. I would tell the heads of the FBI and CIA that I would go on national TV and hold them personally responsible if they failed.


If i were a bad president i go on vacation, maybe play some golf.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 03:03
The first thing you have to wonder is; "When"?
Then you have to figure out; "Where"?
Somebody needs to theorize; "How"?

All you have is that short statement in a memo;
"Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

With that little bit of information how could 9/11 have been prevented?
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 03:05
The first thing you have to wonder is; "When"?
Then you have to figure out; "Where"?
Somebody needs to theorize; "How"?

All you have is that short statement in a memo;
"Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

With that little bit of information how could 9/11 have been prevented?
Ah, but there's the rub. Bush and his advisors had far more than that statement to work with. Give me a break.
Chess Squares
19-10-2004, 03:05
The first thing you have to wonder is; "When"?
Then you have to figure out; "Where"?
Somebody needs to theorize; "How"?

All you have is that short statement in a memo;
"Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

With that little bit of information how could 9/11 have been prevented?
there was more than that one memo, but thanks for the ridiculous attempt at cherry picking and syphoning information to make your side look better
Stephistan
19-10-2004, 03:06
The first thing you have to wonder is; "When"?
Then you have to figure out; "Where"?
Somebody needs to theorize; "How"?

All you have is that short statement in a memo;
"Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

With that little bit of information how could 9/11 have been prevented?

Well it couldn't of been by Bush, given he clearly said that "Terrorism is not a high priority for me" after he was appointed by the Supreme Court.. although maybe Clinton's warnings to him on the way out made him decide to get a "report"
Togarmah
19-10-2004, 03:07
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't that memo get passed round the office sometime during fiscal year 2001?
New Granada
19-10-2004, 03:07
The first thing you have to wonder is; "When"?
Then you have to figure out; "Where"?
Somebody needs to theorize; "How"?

All you have is that short statement in a memo;
"Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

With that little bit of information how could 9/11 have been prevented?



Wasnt a statement in a memo.
IT WAS THE TITLE OF THE MEMO
THE MEMO ABOUT THAT SUBJECT
Ashmoria
19-10-2004, 03:07
id take a good hard look at bin laden and alqaida and see how credible the memo is. (well not ME but id have one of my "guys" do it)

i dont blame bush for 9/11 but warnings werent taken seriously and the concerns of field agents went unaddressed by the fbi.

im hoping we do better in the future
Straughn
19-10-2004, 03:08
and you recieve a memo that reads; "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

What do you do?
Let's say i'm the "president" and i already have a strong familial connection to the Bin Laden family already ....
i talk to these friends, invite 'em to the white house to smoke a stogie or two and discuss how it's a great idea to invade Iraq.
Seriously, a review of the available information on him goes into effect and assessment of the threat capability, a function that millions of taxpayers had already been paying for for some time. Shouldn't be too hard to get somewhere since the pres' daddy was the HEAD OF THE CIA, as well as a partner in Carlyle (sp) who had regular business dealings with the same family, and i assume some kind of agreement would likely be reached through the usual channels.
Either a gross "misunderestimation", or something far more sinister and less pleasant to consider.
....more?
Chikyota
19-10-2004, 03:08
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't that memo get passed round the office sometime during fiscal year 2001?
August 6th.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 03:09
This is pretty old news. Even Michael Moore used it in his film. All the memo said was: "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”. How can the President have prevented 9/11 from that little bit of information? He couldn't have, no one could have, and that's the obviousness that you liberals are overlooking.
Chess Squares
19-10-2004, 03:10
This is pretty old news. Even Michael Moore used it in his film. All the memo said was: "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”. How can the President have prevented 9/11 from that little bit of information? He couldn't have, no one could have, and that's the obviousness that you liberals are overlooking.
that was the TITLE of ONE memo, stop beign a dumbfuck

and hasnt Myrth or some one canned this punk's spam yet?

and oh yeah, this is a multinational private forum, your freedom of speech doesnt apply, and the fact you are spamming makes it apply even less
New Granada
19-10-2004, 03:13
This is pretty old news. Even Michael Moore used it in his film. All the memo said was: "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”. How can the President have prevented 9/11 from that little bit of information? He couldn't have, no one could have, and that's the obviousness that you liberals are overlooking.


Condoleeza Rice told the 9/11 commission that the title of the memo was "bin laden determined to strike inside the united states."


You may be unaware, but the title of a memo indicates what the body of the memo will talk about.

Maybe bush's handlers give him memo's that say things like:

---

---- Office of the Director of Central Intelligence ----


To: President George Bush Jr.
From: DCI Porter Goss
Re: Dog ate the biscuit.
Date: 10/15/2004

The dog ate the biscuit.


---

But i doubt it.
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 03:18
This is pretty old news. Even Michael Moore used it in his film. All the memo said was: "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”. How can the President have prevented 9/11 from that little bit of information? He couldn't have, no one could have, and that's the obviousness that you liberals are overlooking.Here's what you're overlooking (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0409041pdb1.html), namely, the text of the August 6 PDB. You sure you want to try to call us out on this?
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 03:20
You liberals love ignoring the point.

If it goes against the propaganda the Democratic Party feeds you it must be wrong.

If that memo sad WHEN WHERE HOW then it could have been prevented, obviously that memo didn't offer that information because terrorists were able to kill 3000 people that day.

You keep saying it could have been prevented, but none of you can figure out how 9/11 could have been stopped. So far most of you just keep on flaming, and the liberal moderators are allowing you to. Chess Squares, you hate what I post, you request they ban me, but your always the first one to post a reply - thank you for giving me that power over you.
Monkeypimp
19-10-2004, 03:21
Naturally I would have ignored everything else too, and gone on a month long vacation. Actually I'd like to do that now.
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 03:24
You liberals love ignoring the point.

If it goes against the propaganda the Democratic Party feeds you it must be wrong.

If that memo sad WHEN WHERE HOW then it could have been prevented, obviously that memo didn't offer that information because terrorists were able to kill 3000 people that day.

You keep saying it could have been prevented, but none of you can figure out how 9/11 could have been stopped. So far most of you just keep on flaming, and the liberal moderators are allowing you to. Chess Squares, you hate what I post, you request they ban me, but your always the first one to post a reply - thank you for giving me that power over you.If it said where when and how, then your mother could stop it. For fuck's sake, man, it's their job to think about what might happen and plan to stop it. That's why they're responsible for national security--not because we will always have exact intelligence, but because they're supposed to be able to fucking figure out what might happen and try to stop it ahead of time.
Chess Squares
19-10-2004, 03:24
You liberals love ignoring the point.

If it goes against the propaganda the Democratic Party feeds you it must be wrong.

If that memo sad WHEN WHERE HOW then it could have been prevented, obviously that memo didn't offer that information because terrorists were able to kill 3000 people that day.

You keep saying it could have been prevented, but none of you can figure out how 9/11 could have been stopped. So far most of you just keep on flaming, and the liberal moderators are allowing you to. Chess Squares, you hate what I post, you request they ban me, but your always the first one to post a reply - thank you for giving me that power over you.
the only person ignoring any point is YOU, and wha ta grand job, you ignore the very point you introduce and want us to explain. hey how can we explain it if you ignore every single post but those that agree with you.

and no one has requested you be banned, i have requested you be limited to 1 piece of partisan bullshit per day. grow up
Togarmah
19-10-2004, 03:25
Condoleeza Rice told the 9/11 commission that the title of the memo was "bin laden determined to strike inside the united states."


You may be unaware, but the title of a memo indicates what the body of the memo will talk about.

Maybe bush's handlers give him memo's that say things like:

---

---- Office of the Director of Central Intelligence ----


To: President George Bush Jr.
From: DCI Porter Goss
Re: Dog ate the biscuit.
Date: 10/15/2004

The dog ate the biscuit.


---

But i doubt it.


During a pet care dispute with roomates I once wrote the following memo:

To: Lazy Motherf*ckers
From: Me
Re: Cat Needs Feeding
Date: ?

The cat needs feeding, stupid bitches.
And do something about the f*cking litter box too.


Needless to say it didn't work. Maybe Bush has their problem you know.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 03:26
You're faced with the absolute truth that 9/11 could never have been prevented, but you still point the finger of blame. You're fucking sheep.
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 03:28
You're faced with the absolute truth that 9/11 could never have been prevented, but you still point the finger of blame. You're fucking sheep.
You've provided no absolute truth, for one. You've extrapolated something out of a mountainous pile of horseshit, and called it a diamond.

Secondly, no one on this thread has suggested that the August 6 PDB was a magic bullet that should have allowed the Bush administration to stop the 9/11 attacks. It is entirely possible that the Bush administration could have done everything right and 9/11 would still have happened, but the Bush administration didn't do everything they could. Look at the whole fucking picture, moron.
New Granada
19-10-2004, 03:31
You're faced with the absolute truth that 9/11 could never have been prevented, but you still point the finger of blame. You're fucking sheep.


had the tens of millions of dollars wasted persecuting bill clinton been spent by the bush admin tracking down leads such as the 'phoenix memo,'
9/11 could have been easily prevented.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 03:33
Sheep I says.
New Granada
19-10-2004, 03:33
Sheep I says.


And yea verily, none payed him serious heed.
Tellacar
19-10-2004, 03:33
You're faced with the absolute truth that 9/11 could never have been prevented, but you still point the finger of blame. You're fucking sheep.

Pot, meet the kettle. You're spewing out a conservative point of view, the same goddamn fucking view that every conservative has. Quit being so damn self delusional that you think you’re actually saying something we HAVEN’T heard before.
Sleepytime Villa
19-10-2004, 03:37
since this is obviously a bush basher..lets see what would kerry have done..

he wouldnt have done anything different but woulda claimed he had done dozens of things all ...depending on which group he was speaking to at the time and what he thought they wanted to hear...thanx
Siriclin
19-10-2004, 03:39
You're faced with the absolute truth that 9/11 could never have been prevented, but you still point the finger of blame. You're fucking sheep.

Ok, someone said that there is a possiblity that a terrorist is going to kill people in the US. Related documents suggested them using Air Planes. Air planes usually have about 200 people in them. So I would have said "holy shit!! At least 200 people will die!!" And I wouldnt play golf, I would investigate.
If someone mentions to you that people are going to die while your president, you don't go on vacation, you frickin investigate. LOTS could have happened to stop it. If they had looked in depth they could have seen exactly what was happening. But did they? Nope. They played golf. Then they went on a series of unnecissary wars that have lowered our standing in international society and killed our people.
If you want a president that ignores threats to his country, believes that we shouldnt care what other countries think of us, especially our allies, and that American lives are just something you throw at a problem till it goes away, Go Ahead. Vote for Bush.
If you Don't, you'd realize that Kerry is a bad candidate to. Hell, Nader is bad in many ways too. I would vote against Bush, not for Kerry. Sadly, I can't vote this time around being 4 years to young.
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 03:39
Let me add this--I'm currently reading Senator Bob Graham's new book about the problems in the intelligence community prior to and since the 9/11 attacks, and he points out no fewer than 12 different times where the conspiracy might have--and I emphasize as does Graham the might--been rolled up at least in part if the intelligence services had done a better job of communicating with each other.
Chikyota
19-10-2004, 03:41
since this is obviously a bush basher..lets see what would kerry have done..

he wouldnt have done anything different but woulda claimed he had done dozens of things all ...depending on which group he was speaking to at the time and what he thought they wanted to hear...thanx

Care to back this accusation up? Most of Kerry's supposed flip-flopping remains unsubstantiated or outright false.
Chess Squares
19-10-2004, 03:43
since this is obviously a bush basher..lets see what would kerry have done..

he wouldnt have done anything different but woulda claimed he had done dozens of things all ...depending on which group he was speaking to at the time and what he thought they wanted to hear...thanx
i swear to god im going to get a pair of virtual scissors and start removing your people's strings
Aquinion
19-10-2004, 03:44
and you recieve a memo that reads; "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

What do you do?

If this memo came to me today, I'd have my homeland security advisor raise the threat level a color, then go on TV and scare the shit out of people by referring to the "specific threat" to the US. Then I'd wait for more information from my intelligence people.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 03:44
He went on vacation. See you're believing the propaganda. You can grab a huge list of Presidents and their time spent at the White House, very little time is spent there, because you don't have to be at the White House to run the country. Your still believing in those Michael Moore lies.
Togarmah
19-10-2004, 03:55
If this memo came to me today, I'd have my homeland security advisor raise the threat level a color, then go on TV and scare the shit out of people by referring to the "specific threat" to the US. Then I'd wait for more information from my intelligence people.

But no-one pays attention to memos, ever - unless they are authorizing extra vacation days or early office closing, otherwise forget it.

Just look at my cat memo, I still had to step in and feed the damn thing before it starved to death. And do the goddamn litter box too. You see memo's are useless.

I'll prove it:

To: NSer's
From: Me:
Re: Bush's failure to prevent 9.11 has been beaten to death.
Date: 18 Oct. 2004

Bush's failure to prevent 9.11 has been beaten to death over the past few months. No amount of further discussion will resovle this issue. Please stop posting about it.


Now, I bet that doesn't work, because no-one will pay attention to it. Like I said no-one ever pays attention to memos. If they wanted to get Bush's attention about Bin Laden they should have made it part of a special offer with coupons. You know like "Free-Cheeseburger with successful interdiction of Bin Laden threat."

At least people sometimes act on coupons. Not memos though.
Siriclin
19-10-2004, 03:55
He went on vacation. See you're believing the propaganda. You can grab a huge list of Presidents and their time spent at the White House, very little time is spent there, because you don't have to be at the White House to run the country. Your still believing in those Michael Moore lies.

Uh... I didn't watch the debate, I paid no heed to either of the conventions, I never saw Farenhuit 9/11... I have made ALL of my conclusions based on independent research from no partisan sites as well as both republican and Democratic sites. If you accuse me of being a sheep, it is not I that is blind.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 03:59
Uh... I didn't watch the debate, I paid no heed to either of the conventions, I never saw Farenhuit 9/11... I have made ALL of my conclusions based on independent research from no partisan sites as well as both republican and Democratic sites. If you accuse me of being a sheep, it is not I that is blind.

ROFLMAO You are such a fuckin liar!
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 04:00
If this memo came to me today, I'd have my homeland security advisor raise the threat level a color, then go on TV and scare the shit out of people by referring to the "specific threat" to the US. Then I'd wait for more information from my intelligence people.I imagine we'll get all that between now and the election anyway. Bush has an election to win, after all, and a population that isn't frightened out of their minds won't vote for him. I'll bet we get another raise in the threat level between now and November 2, with nonspecific intel but with a target that's a city that normally votes Democratic but is located in a swing state. Someplace like St. Louis, perhaps.

And he won't even need a memo to do it. Do I think the Bush campaign would play with the terror level for political gain? You bet your ass I do.
Siriclin
19-10-2004, 04:01
ROFLMAO You are such a fuckin liar!

Hehehe... sure I am. I had to do it as part of Social Studies Homework.
Allied Alliances
19-10-2004, 04:02
I would build my oxygen bomb and nuke the Middle East, them kill off any after-burn people. If anyone objects, I'd nuke them too. That's the good thing about an oxygen bomb; destroys your enemies, not the atmosphere.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 04:02
I imagine we'll get all that between now and the election anyway. Bush has an election to win, after all, and a population that isn't frightened out of their minds won't vote for him. I'll bet we get another raise in the threat level between now and November 2, with nonspecific intel but with a target that's a city that normally votes Democratic but is located in a swing state. Someplace like St. Louis, perhaps.

And he won't even need a memo to do it. Do I think the Bush campaign would play with the terror level for political gain? You bet your ass I do.

Yeah your thinking of the liberal campaign
and how they're using fear tactics with
new host Steven Baldwin.
End of Darkness
19-10-2004, 04:10
yawn and say I got one of these yesterday.
Sleepytime Villa
19-10-2004, 04:11
Care to back this accusation up? Most of Kerry's supposed flip-flopping remains unsubstantiated or outright false.

another fellow posted this on another thread and it is the best i have seen yet...

For anyone who doubts this:
Flip Flopped On Trade With China

In 1991, Kerry Supported Most-Favored Trade Status For China. “Sen. John Kerry said yesterday that he is breaking party ranks to support most-favored-nation trade status for China … ‘I think the president has some strong arguments about some of the assets of most-favored-nation status for China,’ Kerry said.” (John Aloysius Farrell, “Kerry Breaks Party Ranks To Back China Trade Status,” The Boston Globe, 6/15/91)

In 2000, Kerry Voted In Favor Of Permanent Normal Trade Relations With China. (H.R. 4444, CQ Vote #251: Passed 83-15: R 46-8; D 37-7, 9/19/00, Kerry Voted Yea)

Now Kerry Criticizes The Bush Administration For Trading With China. “Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said on Monday Americans workers were paying the price for President Bush's weak stance on trade with China and other countries. … On the bus tour, Kerry singled out the Bush administration's handling of trade with China and said that country was manipulating its currency.” (Caren Bohan, "Kerry Pledges Aggressive Trade Stance," Reuters, 4/26/04)



Flip-Flopped On Iraq War

Kerry Voted For Authorization To Use Force In Iraq. (H.J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #237: Passed 77-23: R 48-1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, Kerry Voted Yea.)

In First Dem Debate, Kerry Strongly Supported President’s Action In Iraq. KERRY: “George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.” (ABC News, Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Columbia, SC, 5/4/03)

Kerry Later Claimed He Voted “To Threaten” Use Of Force In Iraq. “I voted to threaten the use of force to make Saddam Hussein comply with the resolutions of the United Nations.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Announcement Of Presidential Candidacy, Mount Pleasant, SC, 9/2/03)

Now, Kerry Says He Is Anti-War Candidate. CHRIS MATTHEWS: “Do you think you belong to that category of candidates who more or less are unhappy with this war, the way it’s been fought, along with General Clark, along with Howard Dean and not necessarily in companionship politically on the issue of the war with people like Lieberman, Edwards and Gephardt? Are you one of the anti-war candidates?” KERRY: “I am -- Yes, in the sense that I don’t believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 1/6/04)

Flip-Flopped On Eliminating Marriage Penalty For Middle Class

Kerry Said He Will Fight To Keep Tax Relief For Married Couples. “Howard Dean and Gephardt are going to put the marriage penalty back in place. So if you get married in America, we’re going to charge you more taxes. I do not want to do that.” (Fox News’ “Special Report,” 10/23/03)

Said Democrats Fought To End Marriage Penalty Tax. “We fought hard to get rid of the marriage penalty.” (MSNBC’s “News Live,” 7/31/03)

But, In 1998, Kerry Voted Against Eliminating Marriage Penalty Relief For Married Taxpayers With Combined Incomes Less Than $50,000 Per Year, Saving Taxpayers $46 Billion Over 10 Years. (S. 1415, CQ Vote #154: Rejected 48-50: R 5-49; D 43-1, 6/10/98, Kerry Voted Yea)

Flip-Flopped On Patriot Act

Kerry Voted For Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was passed nearly unanimously by the Senate 98-1, and 357-66 in the House. (H.R. 3162, CQ Vote #313: Passed 98-1: R 49-0; D 48-1; I 1-0, 10/25/01, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry Used To Defend His Vote. “Most of [The Patriot Act] has to do with improving the transfer of information between CIA and FBI, and it has to do with things that really were quite necessary in the wake of what happened on September 11th.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Town Hall Meeting, Manchester, NH, 8/6/03)

Now, Kerry Attacks Patriot Act. “We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night. So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time. I’ve been a District Attorney and I know that what law enforcement needs are real tools not restrictions on American’s basic rights.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Iowa State University, 12/1/03)

Kerry Took BOTH Sides On First Gulf War

Kerry Took BOTH Sides In First Gulf War In Separate Letters To Same Constituent. “Rather than take a side--albeit the one he thought was most expedient--Kerry actually stood on both sides of the first Gulf war, much like he did this time around. Consider this ‘Notebook’ item from TNR’s March 25, 1991 issue, which ran under the headline ‘Same Senator, Same Constituent’: ‘Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition ... to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war.’ --letter from Senator John Kerry to Wallace Carter of Newton Centre, Massachusetts, dated January 22 [1991] ‘Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush’s response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf.’ --Senator Kerry to Wallace Carter, January 31 [1991]” (Noam Scheiber, “Noam Scheiber’s Daily Journal of Politics, The New Republic Online, 1/28/04)

Flip-Flopped On Gay Marriage Amendment

In 2002, Kerry Signed Letter “Urging” MA Legislature To Reject Constitutional Amendment Banning Gay Marriage. “We rarely comment on issues that are wholly within the jurisdiction of the General Court, but there are occasions when matters pending before you are of such significance to all residents of the Commonwealth that we think it appropriate for us to express our opinion. One such matter is the proposed Constitutional amendment that would prohibit or seriously inhibit any legal recognition whatsoever of same-sex relationships. We believe it would be a grave error for Massachusetts to enshrine in our Constitution a provision which would have such a negative effect on so many of our fellow residents. … We are therefore united in urging you to reject this Constitutional amendment and avoid stigmatizing so many of our fellow citizens who do not deserve to be treated in such a manner.” (Sen. John Kerry, et al, Letter To Members Of The Massachusetts Legislature, 7/12/02)

Now, In 2004, Kerry Won’t Rule Out Supporting Similar Amendment. “Asked if he would support a state constitutional amendment barring gay and lesbian marriages, Kerry didn’t rule out the possibility. ‘I’ll have to see what language there is,’ he said.” (Susan Milligan, “Kerry Says GOP May Target Him On ‘Wedge Issue,’” The Boston Globe, 2/6/04)

Flip-Flopped On Attacking President During Time Of War

In March 2003, Kerry Promised Not To Attack President When War Began. “Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts … said he will cease his complaints once the shooting starts. ‘It’s what you owe the troops,’ said a statement from Kerry, a Navy veteran of the Vietnam War. ‘I remember being one of those guys and reading news reports from home. If America is at war, I won’t speak a word without measuring how it’ll sound to the guys doing the fighting when they’re listening to their radios in the desert.’” (Glen Johnson, “Democrats On The Stump Plot Their War Rhetoric,” The Boston Globe, 3/11/03)

But Weeks Later, With Troops Just Miles From Baghdad, Kerry Broke His Pledge. “‘What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States,’ Kerry said in a speech at the Peterborough Town Library. Despite pledging two weeks ago to cool his criticism of the administration once war began, Kerry unleashed a barrage of criticism as US troops fought within 25 miles of Baghdad.” (Glen Johnson, “Kerry Says Us Needs Its Own ‘Regime Change,’” The Boston Globe, 4/3/03)

Flip-Flopped On Death Penalty For Terrorists

In 1996, Kerry Attacked Governor Bill Weld For Supporting Death Penalty For Terrorists. KERRY: “Your policy would amount to a terrorist protection policy. Mine would put them in jail.” (1996 Massachusetts Senate Debate, 9/16/96)

In 1996, Kerry Said, “You Can Change Your Mind On Things, But Not On Life-And-Death Issues.” (Timothy J. Connolly, “The ‘Snoozer’ Had Some Life,” [Worcester, MA] Telegram & Gazette, 7/3/96)

But, In 2002, Kerry Said He Supported Death Penalty For Terrorists. KERRY: “The law of the land is the law of the land, but I have also said that I am for the death penalty for terrorists because terrorists have declared war on your country.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 12/1/02)

Flip-Flopped On No Child Left Behind

Kerry Voted For No Child Left Behind Act. (H.R. 1, CQ Vote #371: Adopted 87-10: R 44-3; D 43-6; I 0-1, 12/18/01, Kerry Voted Yea)

But Now Kerry Is Attacking No Child Left Behind As “Mockery.” “Between now and the time I’m sworn in January 2005, I’m going to use every day to make this president accountable for making a mockery of the words ‘No Child Left Behind.’” (Holly Ramer, “Kerry Wants To Make ‘Environmental Justice’ A Priority,” The Associated Press, 4/22/03)

Kerry Trashed NCLB As ‘Unfunded Mandate’ With ‘Laudable’ Goals. “Kerry referred to [No Child Left Behind] as an ‘unfunded mandate’ with ‘laudable’ goals. ‘Without the resources, education reform is a sham,’ Kerry said. ‘I can’t wait to crisscross this country and hold this president accountable for making a mockery of the words “no child left behind.”‘“ (Matt Leon, “Sen. Kerry In Tune With Educators,” The [Quincy, MA] Patriot Ledger, 7/11/03)

Flip-Flopped On Affirmative Action

In 1992, Kerry Called Affirmative Action “Inherently Limited And Divisive.” “[W]hile praising affirmative action as ‘one kind of progress’ that grew out of civil rights court battles, Kerry said the focus on a rights-based agenda has ‘inadvertently driven most of our focus in this country not to the issue of what is happening to the kids who do not get touched by affirmative action, but … toward an inherently limited and divisive program which is called affirmative action.’ That agenda is limited, he said, because it benefits segments of black and minority populations, but not all. And it is divisive because it creates a ‘perception and a reality of reverse discrimination that has actually engendered racism.’” (Lynne Duke, “Senators Seek Serious Dialogue On Race,” The Washington Post, 4/8/92)

In 2004, Kerry Denied Ever Having Called Affirmative Action “Divisive.” CNN’s KELLY WALLACE: “We caught up with the Senator, who said he never called affirmative action divisive, and accused Clark of playing politics.” SEN. KERRY: “That’s not what I said. I said there are people who believe that. And I said mend it, don’t end it. He’s trying to change what I said, but you can go read the quote. I said very clearly I have always voted for it. I’ve always supported it. I’ve never, ever condemned it. I did what Jim Clyburn did and what Bill Clinton did, which is mend it. And Jim Clyburn wouldn’t be supporting it if it were otherwise. So let’s not have any politics here. Let’s keep the truth.” (CNN’s “Inside Politics,” 1/30/04)

Flip-Flopped On Ethanol

Kerry Twice Voted Against Tax Breaks For Ethanol. (S. Con. Res. 18, CQ Vote #44: Rejected 48-52: R 11-32; D 37-20, 3/23/93, Kerry Voted Nay; S. Con. Res. 18, CQ Vote #68: Motion Agreed To 55-43: R 2-40; D 53-3, 3/24/93, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry Voted Against Ethanol Mandates. (H.R. 4624, CQ Vote #255: Motion Agreed To 51-50: R 19-25; D 31-25, 8/3/94, Kerry Voted Nay)

Kerry Voted Twice To Increase Liability On Ethanol, Making It Equal To Regular Gasoline. (S. 517, CQ Vote #87: Motion Agreed To 57-42: R 38-10; D 18-32; I 1-0, 4/25/02 Kerry Voted Nay; S. 14, CQ Vote #208: Rejected 38-57: R 9-40; D 28-17; I 1-0, 6/5/03, Kerry Voted Yea)

On The Campaign Trail, Though, Kerry Is For Ethanol. KERRY: “I’m for ethanol, and I think it’s a very important partial ingredient of the overall mix of alternative and renewable fuels we ought to commit to.” (MSNBC/DNC, Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Des Moines, IA, 11/24/03)

Flip-Flopped On Cuba Sanctions

Senator Kerry Has Long Voted Against Stronger Cuba Sanctions. (H.R. 927, CQ Vote #489, Motion Rejected 59-36: R 50-2; D 9-34, 10/17/95, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 955, CQ Vote #183: Rejected 38-61: R 5-49; D 33-12, 7/17/97, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1234, CQ Vote #189, Motion Agreed To 55-43: R 43-10; D 12-33, 6/30/99, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2549, CQ Vote #137: Motion Agreed To 59-41: R 52-3; D 7-38, 6/20/00, Kerry Voted Nay)

In 2000, Kerry Said Florida Politics Is Only Reason Cuba Sanctions Still In Place. “Senator John F. Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview that a reevaluation of relations with Cuba was ‘way overdue.’ ‘We have a frozen, stalemated, counterproductive policy that is not in humanitarian interests nor in our larger credibility interest in the region,’ Kerry said. … ‘It speaks volumes about the problems in the current American electoral process. … The only reason we don’t reevaluate the policy is the politics of Florida.’” (John Donnelly, “Policy Review Likely On Cuba,” The Boston Globe, 4/9/00)

Now Kerry Panders To Cuban Vote, Saying He Would Not Lift Embargo Against Cuba. TIM RUSSERT: “Would you consider lifting sanctions, lifting the embargo against Cuba?” SEN. KERRY: “Not unilaterally, not now, no.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 8/31/03)

Kerry Does Not Support “Opening Up The Embargo Wily Nilly.” “Kerry said he believes in ‘engagement’ with the communist island nation but that does not mean, ‘Open up the dialogue.’ He believes it ‘means travel and perhaps even remittances or cultural exchanges’ but he does not support ‘opening up the embargo wily nilly.’” (Daniel A. Ricker, “Kerry Says Bush Did Not Build A ‘Legitimate Coalition’ In Iraq,” The Miami Herald, 11/25/03)

Flip-Flopped On NAFTA

Kerry Voted For NAFTA. (H.R. 3450, CQ Vote #395: Passed 61-38: R 34-10; D 27-28, 11/20/93, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry Recognized NAFTA Is Our Future. “‘NAFTA recognizes the reality of today’s economy - globalization and technology,’ Kerry said. ‘Our future is not in competing at the low-level wage job; it is in creating high-wage, new technology jobs based on our skills and our productivity.’” (John Aloysius Farrell, “Senate’s OK Finalizes NAFTA Pact,” The Boston Globe, 11/21/93)

Now, Kerry Expresses Doubt About NAFTA. “Kerry, who voted for NAFTA in 1993, expressed some doubt about the strength of free-trade agreements. ‘If it were before me today, I would vote against it because it doesn’t have environmental or labor standards in it,’ he said.” (David Lightman, “Democrats Battle For Labor’s Backing,” Hartford Courant, 8/6/03)

Flip-Flopped On Double Taxation Of Dividends

December 2002: Kerry Favored Ending Double Taxation Of Dividends. “[T]o encourage investments in the jobs of the future - I think we should eliminate the tax on capital gains for investments in critical technology companies - zero capital gains on $100 million issuance of stock if it’s held for 5 years and has created real jobs. And we should attempt to end the double taxation of dividends.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At The City Club Of Cleveland, 12/3/02)

May 2003: Kerry Said He Opposed Ending Double Taxation Of Dividends. “Kerry also reiterated his opposition to the Republican plan to cut taxes on stock dividends. ‘This is not the time for a dividends tax cut that goes to individuals,’ he said.” (“Kerry Says Time Is On Dems’ Side,” The Associated Press, 5/8/03)

Flip-Flopped On Raising Taxes During Economic Downturn

September 2001: Said Should Not Raise Taxes In Economic Downturn. “The first priority is the economy of our nation. And when you have a downturn in the economy, the last thing you do is raise taxes or cut spending. We shouldn’t do either. We need to maintain a course that hopefully will stimulate the economy. . . . No, we should not raise taxes, but we have to put everything on the table to take a look at why we have this structural problem today. . . .[Y]ou don’t want to raise taxes.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 9/2/01)


We Should “Absolutely Not Raise Taxes.” “Well, I think it’s very clear what I favor because we voted for it early in the spring, which was the Democratic budget alternative that had triggers in it where you didn’t wind up spending money you don’t have. It had a smaller tax cut but more tax cut for a stimulus, which is what we need. So you ask me, what do we need now? Yes, we need additional stimulus. We should absolutely not raise taxes. We should not cut spending. What we need to do is drive the economy of this country. The economy is the number one issue. It is the most important thing we should focus on.” (CNN’s “Evans, Novak, Hunt & Shields,” 9/8/01)


April 2002: Said He Wanted Larger Tax Cut And Was “Not In Favor Of” Repeal. CNN’s TUCKER CARLSON: “Senator Kerry . . . [many Democrats] [g]et a lot of political mileage out of criticizing [President Bush’s tax cut], but nobody has the courage to say repeal it. Are you for repealing it?” KERRY: “It’s not a question of courage. . . . And it’s not an issue right now. We passed appropriately a tax cut as a stimulus, some $40 billion. Many of us thought it should have even maybe been a little bit larger this last year … [T]he next tax cut doesn’t take effect until 2004. If we can grow the economy enough between now and then, if we have sensible policies in place and make good choices, who knows what our choices will be. So it’s simply not a ripe issue right now. And I’m not in favor of turning around today and repealing it.” (CNN’s “Crossfire,” 4/16/02)

December 2002: Flip-Flopped, Would Keep Tax Cuts From Taking Effect. NBC’s TIM RUSSERT: “Senator . . . should we freeze or roll back the Bush tax cut?” KERRY: “Well, I wouldn’t take away from people who’ve already been given their tax cut … What I would not do is give any new Bush tax cuts.” … RUSSERT: “So the tax cut that’s scheduled to be implemented in the coming years …” KERRY: “No new tax cut under the Bush plan. . . . It doesn’t make economic sense.” … RUSSERT: “Now, this is a change …” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 12/1/02)


Called For Freeze Of Bush Tax Cuts In Favor Of Year-Long Suspension Of Payroll Taxes On First $10,000 Of Personal Income. “Kerry said Bush’s tax cuts have mainly benefited the rich while doing little for the economy. Kerry is proposing to halt Bush’s additional tax cuts and instead impose a yearlong suspension of payroll taxes on the first $10,000 of income to help the poor and middle class.” (Tyler Bridges, “Kerry Visits Miami To Start Raising Funds,” The Miami Herald, 12/7/02)


Flip-Flopped On Small Business Income Taxes

Kerry Voted Against Exempting Small Businesses And Family Farms From Clinton Income Tax Increase. (S. Con. Res. 18, CQ Vote #79: Motion Agreed To 54-45: R 0-43; D 54-2, 3/25/93, Kerry Voted Yea)

Three Months Later, Kerry Voted In Favor Of Proposal To Exclude Small Businesses From The Increased Income Tax. (S. 1134, CQ Vote #171: Motion Rejected 56-42: R 43-0; D 13-42, 6/24/93, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry Claimed He Fought To Exempt Small Businesses From Income Tax Increases. “I worked to amend the reconciliation bill so that it would … exempt small businesses who are classified as subchapter S corporations from the increased individual income tax.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 6/29/93, p. S 8268)

Kerry Flip-Flopped On 50-Cent Gas Tax Increase

In 1994, Kerry Backed Half-Dollar Increase In Gas Tax. “Kerry said [the Concord Coalition’s scorecard] did not accurately reflect individual lawmakers’ efforts to cut the deficit. ‘It doesn’t reflect my $43 billion package of cuts or my support for a 50-cent increase in the gas tax,’ Kerry said.” (Jill Zuckman, “Deficit-Watch Group Gives High Marks To 7 N.E. Lawmakers,” The Boston Globe, 3/1/94)

Two Years Later, Kerry Flip-Flopped. “Kerry no longer supports the 50-cent [gas tax] hike, nor the 25-cent hike proposed by the [Concord] coalition.” (Michael Grunwald, “Kerry Gets Low Mark On Budgeting,” The Boston Globe, 4/30/96)

Flip-Flopped On Leaving Abortion Up To States

Kerry Used To Say Abortion Should Be Left Up To States. “I think the question of abortion is one that should be left for the states to decide,” Kerry said during his failed 1972 Congressional bid. (“John Kerry On The Issues,” The [Lowell, MA] Sun, 10/11/72)

Now Kerry Says Abortion Is Law Of Entire Nation. “The right to choose is the law of the United States. No person has the right to infringe on that freedom. Those of us who are in government have a special responsibility to see to it that the United States continues to protect this right, as it must protect all rights secured by the constitution.” (Sen. John Kerry [D-MA], Congressional Record, 1/22/85)

Flip-Flopped On Litmus Tests For Judicial Nominees

Kerry Used To Oppose Litmus Tests For Judicial Nominees. “Throughout two centuries, our federal judiciary has been a model institution, one which has insisted on the highest standards of conduct by our public servants and officials, and which has survived with undiminished respect. Today, I fear that this institution is threatened in a way that we have not seen before. … This threat is that of the appointment of a judiciary which is not independent, but narrowly ideological, through the systematic targeting of any judicial nominee who does not meet the rigid requirements of litmus tests imposed …” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 2/3/86, p. S864)

But Now Kerry Says He Would Only Support Supreme Court Nominees Who Pledge To Uphold Roe v. Wade. “The potential retirement of Supreme Court justices makes the 2004 presidential election especially important for women, Senator John F. Kerry told a group of female Democrats yesterday, and he pledged that if elected president he would nominate to the high court only supporters of abortion rights under its Roe v. Wade decision. … ‘Any president ought to appoint people to the Supreme Court who understand the Constitution and its interpretation by the Supreme Court. In my judgment, it is and has been settled law that women, Americans, have a defined right of privacy and that the government does not make the decision with respect to choice. Individuals do.’” (Glen Johnson, “Kerry Vows Court Picks To Be Abortion-Rights Supporters,” The Boston Globe, 4/9/03)

Flip-Flopped On Federal Health Benefits

In 1993, Kerry Expressed Doubts That Federal Employees Health Benefits System Worked Well. “Hillary Rodham Clinton today offered a fresh description of one of the most confusing elements of the Administration health care plan, the health insurance purchasing alliances, saying they would let all Americans choose coverage in the way members of Congress do. … Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said he was not sure that the Federal program worked all that well.” (Adam Clymer, “Hillary Clinton Says Health Plan Will Be Familiar,” The New York Times, 12/8/93)

Kerry Expressed Personal Dissatisfaction With His Coverage Through Federal Program. “Earlier this month, when Hillary Rodham Clinton came to Boston and vowed that average Americans would get as good coverage as that enjoyed by their senators and representatives, Sen. John F. Kerry told Clinton that he thought the country could do better. The Massachusetts Democrat said he was thinking, among other recent disasters, of his $500 dental bill for treatment of an abscessed tooth. ‘Because it was done in the dentist’s office, rather than the hospital, they didn’t cover it. So they were urging me to go spend twice as much in a hospital,’ said Kerry, who is covered by BACE, the Beneficial Association of Capitol Employees.” (Ana Puga, “Lawmakers Talk Health Care,” The Boston Globe, 12/19/93)

Now, On Campaign Trail, Kerry Is Enthusiastic About Health Care He Receives As Senator. “As a U.S. Senator, I could get the best health care in the world. Most people aren’t so lucky, and we need to change that. That’s why my plan gives every American access to the same kind of health care that members of Congress give themselves. … Because your family’s health care is just as important as any politicians’ in Washington.” (Sen. John Kerry, “Affordable Health Care For All Americans,” Remarks At Mercy Medical, Cedar Rapids, IA, 12/14/03)

Kerry: “I’m Going To Make Available To Every American The Same Health Care Plan That Senators And Congressmen Give Themselves …” (Sen. John Kerry, AARP Democrat Candidate Debate, Bedford, NH, 11/18/03)

Flip-Flopped On Tax Credits For Small Business Health

In 2001, Kerry Voted Against Amendment Providing $70 Billion For Tax Credits For Small Business To Purchase Health Insurance. (H. Con. Res. 83, CQ Vote #83: Rejected 49-51: R 48-2; D 1-49, 4/5/01, Kerry Voted Nay)

Now, Kerry Promises Refundable Tax Credits To Small Businesses For Health Coverage. “Refundable tax credits for up to 50 percent of the cost of coverage will be offered to small businesses and their employees to make health care more affordable.” (“John Kerry’s Plan To Make Health Care Affordable To Every American,” John Kerry For President Website, www.johnkerry.com, Accessed 1/21/04)

Flip-Flopped On Health Coverage

In 1994, Kerry Said Democrats Push Health Care Too Much. “[Kerry] said Kennedy and Clinton’s insistence on pushing health care reform was a major cause of the Democratic Party’s problems at the polls.” (Joe Battenfeld, “Jenny Craig Hit With Sex Harassment Complaint - By Men,” Boston Herald, 11/30/94)

But Now Kerry Calls Health Care His “Passion.” “Sen. John Kerry says expanding coverage is ‘my passion.’” (Susan Page, “Health Specifics Could Backfire On Candidates,” USA Today, 6/2/03)

Flip-Flopped On Welfare Reform

In 1993, Kerry Voted To Kill Bipartisan Welfare Work Requirement. In 1993, Kerry and Kennedy voted against a welfare-to-work requirement that was supported by many Democrats, including Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Harry Reid (D-NV):


Fiscal 1993 Supplemental Appropriations - Welfare Work Requirement. “Moynihan, D-N.Y., motion to table (kill) the D’Amato, R-N.Y., amendment to sharply cut federal welfare administration aid to states that do not, within a year, require at least 10 percent of their able-bodied welfare recipients without dependents to work. The required workfare participation rate would be increased by 2 percent a year until 50 percent were working.” (H.R. 2118, CQ Vote #163: Rejected 34-64: R 1-42; D 33-22, 6/22/93, Kerry Voted Yea)


But In 1996, Kerry Voted For Welfare Reform. (H.R. 3734, CQ Vote #262: Adopted 78-21: R 53-0; D 25-21, 8/1/96, Kerry Voted Yea)

Flip-Flops On Stock Options Expensing

Kerry Used To Oppose Expensing Stock Options. “Democratic Senator John F. Kerry was among those fighting expensing of stock options.” (Sue Kirchhoff, “Senate Blocks Options,” The Boston Globe, 7/16/02)

Kerry Said Expensing Options Would Not “Benefit The Investing Public.” KERRY: “Mr. President, the Financial Accounting Standards Board … has proposed a rule that will require companies to amortize the value of stock options and deduct them off of their earnings statements … I simply cannot see how the FASB rule, as proposed, will benefit the investing public.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 3/10/94, p. S2772)

But Now Kerry Says He Supports Carrying Of Stock Options As Corporate Expense. “On an issue related to corporate scandals, Kerry for the first time endorsed the carrying of stock options as a corporate expense. The use of stock options was abused by some companies and contributed to overly optimistic balance sheets. Kerry applauded steps by Microsoft Corp. to eliminate stock options for employees and said all publicly traded companies should be required to expense such options.” (Dan Balz, “Kerry Raps Bush Policy On Postwar Iraq,” The Washington Post, 7/11/03)

Flip-Flopped On Medical Marijuana

Kerry Said His “Personal Disposition Is Open To The Issue Of Medical Marijuana.” “Aaron Houston of the Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana said that just a month ago Mr. Kerry seemed to endorse medical marijuana use, and when asked about the content of his mysterious study, said, ‘I am trying to find out. I don’t know.’ Mr. Kerry did say his ‘personal disposition is open to the issue of medical marijuana’ and that he’d stop Drug Enforcement Administration raids on patients using the stuff under California’s medical marijuana law.” (Jennifer Harper, “Inside Politics,” The Washington Times, 8/8/03)

But Now Kerry Says He Wants To Wait For Study Analyzing Issue Before Making Final Decision. “The Massachusetts Democrat said Wednesday he’d put off any final decision on medical marijuana because there’s ‘a study under way analyzing what the science is.’” (Jennifer Harper, “Inside Politics,” The Washington Times, 8/8/03)

Flip-Flopped On Burma Sanctions

In 1995, Kerry Was Against Burma Sanctions. “‘I question whether isolation is a successful means of promoting political change,’ Kerry told a constituent in a 1995 letter justifying his opposition to a Burma sanction bill.” (Geeta Anand, et al., “Menino Gets Ahead Of Himself, Starts Contemplating Third Term,” The Boston Globe, 5/18/97)

But Now Kerry Supports Burma Sanctions. “In his 1996 reelection campaign, Kerry, after Governor William F. Weld took up the cause, was badgered by advisers into shifting his position. But as he eyes a presidential campaign and the Burma sanction movement gains credibility, Kerry … describes the Burma regime as a ‘semi-criminalized dictatorship … which should not be treated with respect by other nations, but should be instead subject to limitations on travel, investment, and access to the most developed nations.’” (Geeta Anand, et al., “Menino Gets Ahead Of Himself, Starts Contemplating Third Term,” The Boston Globe, 5/18/97)

Flip-Flopped On Military Experience As Credential For Public Office

Kerry: Service Should Not Be “Litmus Test” For Leadership. “Mr. President, you and I know that if support or opposition to the war were to become a litmus test for leadership, America would never have leaders or recover from the divisions created by that war. You and I know that if service or nonservice in the war is to become a test of qualification for high office, you would not have a Vice President, nor would you have a Secretary of Defense and our Nation would never recover from the divisions created by that war.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/08/92, p. S17709)

But Now Kerry Constantly “Challenges The Stature Of His Democratic Opponents” Over Their Lack Of Military Service. “And more than ever, Mr. Kerry is invoking his stature as a Vietnam veteran as he challenges the stature of his Democratic opponents -- none of whom, he frequently points out, have ‘worn the uniform of our country’ -- to withstand a debate with Mr. Bush on national security.” (Adam Nagourney, “As Campaign Tightens, Kerry Sharpens Message,” The New York Times, 8/10/03)

Flip-Flopped On PACs

Kerry Used To Decry “Special Interests And Their PAC Money.” “‘I’m frequently told by cynics in Washington that refusing PAC money is naive,’ Kerry told his supporters in 1985. ‘Do you agree that it is “naïve” to turn down special interests and their PAC money?’” (Glen Johnson, “In A Switch, Kerry Is Launching A PAC,” The Boston Globe, 12/15/01)

But Now, Kerry Has Established His Own PAC. “A week after repeating that he has refused to accept donations from political action committees, Senator John F. Kerry announced yesterday that he was forming a committee that would accept PAC money for him to distribute to other Democratic candidates. … Kerry’s stance on soft money, unregulated donations funneled through political parties, puts him in the position of raising the type of money that he, McCain, and others in the campaign-finance reform movement are trying to eliminate.” (Glen Johnson, “In A Switch, Kerry Is Launching A PAC,” The Boston Globe, 12/15/01)

Flip-Flopped On $10,000 Donation Limit To His PAC

When Kerry Established His PAC In 2001, He Instituted A $10,000 Limit On Donations. “A week after repeating that he has refused to accept donations from political action committees, Senator John F. Kerry announced yesterday that he was forming a committee that would accept PAC money for him to distribute to other Democratic candidates … The statement also declared that the new PAC would voluntarily limit donations of so-called soft money to $10,000 per donor per year and disclose the source and amount of all such donations.” (Glen Johnson, “In A Switch, Kerry Is Launching A Pac,” The Boston Globe, 12/15/01)


One Year Later, Kerry Started Accepting Unlimited Contributions. “Senator John F. Kerry, who broke with personal precedent last year when he established his first political action committee, has changed his fund-raising guidelines again, dropping a $10,000 limit on contributions from individuals, a cap he had touted when establishing the PAC. The Massachusetts Democrat said yesterday he decided to accept unlimited contributions, which has already allowed him to take in ‘soft money’ donations as large as $25,000, because of the unprecedented fund-raising demands confronting him as a leader in the Senate Democratic caucus.” (Glen Johnson, “Kerry Shifts Fund-Raising Credo For His Own PAC,” The Boston Globe, 10/4/02)

Flip-Flopped On Using Personal Funds In 1996 Race

In 1996, Kerry And Weld Established $500,000 Limit Of Personal Wealth To Be Used In Senate Campaign. “In 1996, Kerry and Weld gave their already noteworthy Senate race added significance by establishing a spending cap. The candidates agreed to spend no more than $6.9 million from July 1 through the election. Weld ended up spending $6.6 million and Kerry $6.3 million. One key element of the agreement limited the candidates to spending $500,000 in personal wealth, a clause Weld favored because Kerry is married to a millionaire, Teresa Heinz.” (Glen Johnson, “In Kerry’s Plan For A Pac, The Resolution Of Opposites,” The Boston Globe, 12/18/01)

Kerry Broke Agreement By Spending $1.2 Million Over Limit. “[P]ost-election reports showed a last-minute infusion of $1.7 million from Kerry’s wife, heiress Teresa Heinz. … [K]erry denied that his campaign violated its agreement. The money had been loaned--not contributed--by his wife, he explained. ‘There was nothing in the agreement that restricted us from taking a loan … and we paid it back in $1,000 and $2,000 chunks.’” (“Global Ecology Lobby Rocked By Defection,” Political Finance, The Newsletter, 1/02)

Flip-Flopped On Israel Security Fence

October 2003: Kerry Calls Fence “Barrier To Peace.” “And I know how disheartened Palestinians are by the Israeli government’s decision to build a barrier off the green line, cutting deeply into Palestinian areas. We do not need another barrier to peace. Provocative and counterproductive measures only harm Israel’s security over the long- term, they increase hardships to the Palestinian people, and they make the process of negotiating an eventual settlement that much harder.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks Before Arab American Institute National Leadership Conference, Dearborn, MI, 10/17/03)

February 2004: Kerry Calls Fence “Legitimate Act Of Self-Defense.” “US Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the frontrunner in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, described Israel’s construction of a security barrier as a ‘legitimate act of self defense’ after Sunday’s suicide bombing in Jerusalem, clarifying a position he took in October when he told an Arab American audience, ‘We don’t need another barrier to peace.’” (Janine Zacharia, “Kerry Defends Security Fence,” The Jerusalem Post, 2/25/04)

Flip-Flop-Flipped On Ballistic Missile Defense

Kerry Called For Cancellation Of Missile Defense Systems In 1984 And Has Voted Against Funding For Missile Defense At Least 53 Times Between 1985 And 2000. (“John Kerry On The Defense Budget,” Campaign Position Paper, John Kerry For U.S. Senate, 1984; S. 1160, CQ Vote #99: Rejected 21-78: R 2-50; D 19-28, 6/4/85, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1160, CQ Vote #100: Rejected 38-57: R 6-45; D 32-12, 6/4/85, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1160, CQ Vote #101: Rejected 36-59: R 1-49; D 35-10, 6/4/85, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1160, CQ Vote #103: Rejected 33-62: R 28-22; D 5-40, 6/4/85, Kerry Voted Nay; H.J. Res. 465, CQ Vote #365: Motion Agreed To 64-32: R 49-2; D 15-30, 12/10/85, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 4515, CQ Vote #122: Ruled Non-Germane 45-47: R 7-42; D 38-5, 6/6/86, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 2638, CQ Vote #176: Motion Agreed To 50-49: R 41-11; D 9-38, 8/5/86, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2638, CQ Vote #177: Rejected 49-50: R 10-42; D 39-8, 8/5/86, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1174, CQ Vote #248: Motion Agreed To 58-38: R 8-37; D 50-1, 9/17/87, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1174, CQ Vote #259: Motion Agreed To 51-50: R 37-9; D 13-41, With Vice President Bush Casting An “ Yea “ Vote, 9/22/87, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2355, CQ Vote #124: Motion Agreed To 66-29: R 38-6; D 28-23, 5/11/88, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2355, CQ Vote #125: Motion Agreed To 50-46: R 38-7; D 12-39, 5/11/88, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2355, CQ Vote #126: Motion Rejected 47-50: R 38-6; D 9-44, 5/11/88, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2355, CQ Vote #128: Motion Rejected 48-50: R 6-39; D 42-11, 5/11/88, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 2355, CQ Vote #136: Motion Agreed To 56-37: R 9-34; D 47-3, 5/13/88, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 2355, CQ Vote #137: Motion Agreed To 51-43: R 38-5; D 13-38, 5/13/88, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 4264, CQ Vote #251: Motion Rejected 35-58: R 35-9; D 0-49, 7/14/88, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 4781, CQ Vote #296: Motion Agreed To 50-44: R 5-39; D 45-5, 8/5/88, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1352, CQ Vote #148: Motion Agreed To 50-47: R 37-6; D 13-41, 7/27/89, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 3072, CQ Vote #202: Rejected 34-66: R 27-18; D 7-48, 9/26/89, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 3072, CQ Vote #213: Adopted 53-47: R 39-6; D 14-41, 9/28/89, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2884, CQ Vote #223: Adopted 54-44: R 2-42; D 52-2, 8/4/90, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 2884, CQ Vote #225: Motion Agreed To 56-41: R 39-4; D 17-37, 8/4/90, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2884, CQ Vote #226: Motion Agreed To 54-43: R 37-6; D 17-37, 8/4/90, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 5803, CQ Vote #319: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 4739, CQ Vote #320: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1507, CQ Vote #168: Rejected 39-60: R 4-39; D 35-21, 7/31/91, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1507, CQ Vote #171: Motion Agreed To 60-38: R 40-3; D 20-35, 8/1/91, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1507, CQ Vote #172: Motion Agreed To 64-34: R 39-4; D 25-30, 8/1/91, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1507, CQ Vote #173: Rejected 46-52: R 5-38; D 41-14, 8/1/91, Kerry Voted Yea; H.R. 2521, CQ Vote #207: Motion Agreed To 50-49: R 38-5; D 12-44, 9/25/91, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2403, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 61-38: R 7-36; D 54-2, 5/6/92, Kerry Voted Yea; H.R. 4990, CQ Vote #108: Adopted 90-9: R 34-9; D 56-0, 5/21/92, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 3114, CQ Vote #182: Motion Rejected 43-49: R 34-5; D 9-44, 8/7/92, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 3114, CQ Vote #214: Rejected 48-50: R 5-38; D 43-12, 9/17/92, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 3114, CQ Vote #215: Adopted 52-46: R 39-4; D 13-42, 9/17/92, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 5504, CQ Vote #228: Adopted 89-4: R 36-4; D 53-0, 9/22/92, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1298, CQ Vote #251: Adopted 50-48: R 6-36; D 44-12, 9/9/93, Kerry Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 63, CQ Vote #64: Rejected 40-59: R 2-42; D 38-17, 3/22/94, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1026, CQ Vote #354: Motion Agreed To 51-48: R 47-6; D 4-42, 8/3/95, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1087, CQ Vote #384: Rejected 45-54: R 5-49; D 40-5, 8/10/95, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1087, CQ Vote #397: Passed 62-35: R 48-4; D 14-31, 9/5/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #399: Passed 64-34: R 50-3; D 14-31, 9/6/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 2126, CQ Vote #579: Adopted 59-39: R 48-5; D 11-34, 11/16/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #608: Adopted 51-43: R 47-2; D 4-41, 12/19/95, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1635, CQ Vote #157: Rejected 53-46: R 52-0; D 1-46, 6/4/96, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1745, CQ Vote #160: Rejected 44-53: R 4-49; D 40-4, 6/19/96, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1745, CQ Vote #187: Passed 68-31: R 50-2; D 18-29, 7/10/96, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 936, CQ Vote #171: Rejected 43-56: R 2-53; D 41-3, 7/11/97, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1873, CQ Vote #131: Motion Rejected 59-41: R 55-0; D 4-41, 5/13/98, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1873, CQ Vote #262: Motion Rejected 59-41: R 55-0; D 4-41, 9/9/98, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2549, CQ Vote #178: Motion Agreed To 52-48: R 52-3; D 0-45, 7/13/00, Kerry Voted Nay)

Kerry Then Claimed To Support Missile Defense. “I support the development of an effective defense against ballistic missiles that is deployed with maximum transparency and consultation with U.S. allies and other major powers. If there is a real potential of a rogue nation firing missiles at any city in the United States, responsible leadership requires that we make our best, most thoughtful efforts to defend against that threat. The same is true of accidental launch. If it were to happen, no leader could ever explain not having chosen to defend against the disaster when doing so made sense.” (Peace Action Website, “Where Do The Candidates Stand On Foreign Policy?” http://www.peace-action.org/2004/Kerry.html, Accessed 3/10/04)

Now Kerry Campaign Says He Will Defund Missile Defense. FOX NEWS’ MAJOR GARRETT: “Kerry would not say how much all of this would cost. A top military adviser said the Massachusetts Senator would pay for some of it by stopping all funds to deploy a national ballistic missile defense system, one that Kerry doesn’t believe will work.” KERRY ADVISOR RAND BEERS: “He would not go forward at this time because there is not a proof of concept.” (Fox News’ “Special Report,” 3/17/03)

Flip-Flopped On 1991 Iraq War Coalition

At The Time, Kerry Questioned Strength Of 1991 Coalition. “I keep hearing from people, ‘Well, the coalition is fragile, it won’t stay together,’ and my response to that is, if the coalition is so fragile, then what are the vital interests and what is it that compels us to risk our young American’s lives if the others aren’t willing to stay the … course of peace? … I voted against the president, I’m convinced we’re doing this the wrong way …” (CBS’ “This Morning,” 1/16/91)

Now Kerry Has Nothing But Praise For 1991 Coalition. SEN. JOHN KERRY: “In my speech on the floor of the Senate I made it clear, you are strongest when you act with other nations. All presidents, historically, his father, George Herbert Walker Bush, did a brilliant job of building a legitimate coalition and even got other people to help pay for the war.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 1/11/04)

Flip-Flopped On View Of War On Terror

Kerry Said War On Terror Is “Basically A Manhunt.” “Kerry was asked about Bush’s weekend appearance on ‘Meet the Press’ when he called himself a ‘war president.’ The senator, who watched the session, remarked: ‘The war on terrorism is a very different war from the way the president is trying to sell it to us. It’s a serious challenge, and it is a war of sorts, but it is not the kind of war they’re trying to market to America.’ Kerry characterized the war on terror as predominantly an intelligence-gathering and law enforcement operation. ‘It’s basically a manhunt,’ he said. ‘You gotta know who they are, where they are, what they’re planning, and you gotta be able to go get ‘em before they get us.’” (Katherine M. Skiba, “Bush, Kerry Turn Focus To Each Other,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 2/13/04)

Two Weeks Later, Kerry Flip-Flopped, Saying War On Terror Is More Than “A Manhunt”. “This war isn’t just a manhunt – a checklist of names from a deck of cards. In it, we do not face just one man or one terrorist group. We face a global jihadist movement of many groups, from different sources, with separate agendas, but all committed to assaulting the United States and free and open societies around the globe.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At University Of California At Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 2/27/04)

Flip-Flopped On Funding For Our Troops In Iraq

Kerry Pledged To Fund Reconstruction With “Whatever Number” Of Dollars It Took. NBC’S TIM RUSSERT: “Do you believe that we should reduce funding that we are now providing for the operation in Iraq?” SEN. JOHN KERRY: “No. I think we should increase it.” RUSSERT: “Increase funding?” KERRY: “Yes.” RUSSERT: “By how much?” KERRY: “By whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win. It is critical that the United States of America be successful in Iraq, Tim.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 8/31/03)

Then Kerry Voted Against Senate Passage Of Iraq/Afghanistan Reconstruction Package. “Passage of the bill that would appropriate $86.5 billion in fiscal 2004 supplemental spending for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill would provide $10.3 billion as a grant to rebuild Iraq, including $5.1 billion for security and $5.2 billion for reconstruction costs. It also would provide $10 billion as a loan that would be converted to a grant if 90 percent of all bilateral debt incurred by the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein has been forgiven by other countries. Separate provisions limit reconstruction aid to $18.4 billion. It also would provide approximately $65.6 billion for military operations and maintenance and $1.3 billion for veterans medical care.” (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay)

Kerry Later Claimed: “I Actually Did Vote For The $87 Billion Before I Voted Against It.” (Glen Johnson, “Kerry Blasts Bush On Protecting Troops,” The Boston Globe, 3/17/04)

Flip-Flopped On Tapping Strategic Petroleum Reserve

In February 2000, Kerry Said Release Of Oil From Strategic Petroleum Reserve Would Not Be “Relevant.” “Without being specific, Kerry, a key member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, suggested the US could retaliate economically in other trade areas. He also said he does not want a release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. A release ‘is not relevant. It would take months for the oil to get to the market,’ he said.” (Cathy Landry, “US Energy Chief Warns Of Gasoline Crisis,” Platt’s Oilgram News, 2/17/00)

Now, In March 2004, Kerry Called For Stop In Filling Strategic Petroleum Reserve To Reduce Prices. “Kerry would pressure oil-producing nations to increase production and temporarily suspend filling the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, according to campaign documents. ... ‘The Bush administration has put the SPR fill program on automatic pilot without regard to the short-term effect on the US market,’ the campaign documents said. ‘The program needs better management ... Kerry would temporarily suspend filling SPR until oil prices return to normal levels.’” (Patricia Wilson, “Kerry To Offer Plan To Reduce Record Gasoline Prices,” Reuters, 3/29/04)

Flip Flopped On Internet Taxation

In 1998, Kerry Voted To Allow States To Continue Taxing Internet Access After Moratorium Took Effect. Kerry voted against tabling an amendment that would extend the moratorium from two years to three years and allow states that currently impose taxes on Internet access to continue doing so after the moratorium takes effect. (S. 442, CQ Vote #306: Motion Rejected 28-69: R 27-27; D 1-42, 10/7/98, Kerry Voted Nay)

In 2001, Kerry Voted To Extend Internet Tax Moratorium Until 2005 And Allow States To Form Uniform Internet Tax System With Approval Of Congress. (H.R. 1552, CQ Vote #341: Motion Agreed To 57-43: R 35-14; D 22-28; I 0-1, 11/15/01, Kerry Voted Nay)

Kerry Said “We Do Not Support Any Tax On The Internet Itself.” “We do not support any tax on the Internet itself. We don’t support access taxes. We don’t support content taxes. We don’t support discriminatory taxes. Many of us would like to see a permanent moratorium on all of those kinds of taxes. At the same time, a lot of us were caught in a place where we thought it important to send the message that we have to get back to the table in order to come to a consensus as to how we equalize the economic playing field in the United States in a way that is fair.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 11/15/01, p. S11902)
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 04:12
So far the liberal thinkers have only responded with crude remarks. They just don't like these kinds of questions - it hurts their brains. "Oh he doesn't think like us, make him go away he's evil!"
Togarmah
19-10-2004, 04:15
Didn't you people get the memo?

You see, I told everyone that no-one pays attention to memos.
Goed
19-10-2004, 04:15
So far the liberal thinkers have only responded with crude remarks. They just don't like these kinds of questions - it hurts their brains. "Oh he doesn't think like us, make him go away he's evil!"

And that post was the pinnacle of all intelegent thought.

Actually, it was a worthless flame.

No points for you.
Dettibok
19-10-2004, 04:18
Sheep I says.Ad hominem fallacy. Incertonia pointed out a Strawman fallacy. You got the facts of the memo wrong, which I believe is technically not a fallacy, but it still makes your argument unsound.

You're faced with the absolute truth that 9/11 could never have been prevented, Now you're just being silly. If the CIA had additional funding, they may have followed up more leads and found out about the plot. Or they may not have found out. Who knows? Not me, and certainly not you. If your point is that Bush reacted appropriately to the memo, your point is being drowned out by all the other things you are saying.
Goed
19-10-2004, 04:18
A whole bunch of shit he just copied and pasted from georgy's website

Fuck if I'm reading all that. Next time just give us a link. Spammer.
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 04:19
Yeah your thinking of the liberal campaign
and how they're using fear tactics with
new host Steven Baldwin.
No, I'm thinking of the way the terror threat level has been raised every time something inconvenient has come up about the Bush administration. Bad job numbers? Orange Alert. Abu Ghraib scandal? Orange Alert. Stock Market falls? Orange Alert. Give me a fucking break.
MissDefied
19-10-2004, 04:23
another fellow posted this on another thread and it is the best i have seen yet...
Edit

I'd give you points for your research/copy and paste skills. However, you chose the WRONG thread. This is not a Kerry flipflop thread.

In response:

For starters, I'd read the flippin thing.
Then I would be in immediate contact with several of the hundreds of appointed officials who are at my disposal to give me more information related to the memo in question.
I'd probably still go fishing, but at least I would have done the above first.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 04:24
Please, you idiots go on with the rest of your lives believing that the President of the United States knew that 3000 people were going to be killed and did nothing. This is propaganda, I'll remember to use it against you oneday too.
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 04:28
Please, you idiots go on with the rest of your lives believing that the President of the United States knew that 3000 people were going to be killed and did nothing. This is propaganda, I'll remember to use it against you oneday too.Where the fuck has anyone suggested that Bush knew 3,000 people were going to die and did nothing about it? There's a big difference between suggesting that Bush is incompetent and saying that he's guilty of sitting idly by and doing nothing when he knew something was going to happen. Bush is certainly incompetent--I'm not ready to say he's the kind of monster who would have 3,000 civilians killed for political gain.
Cartaka
19-10-2004, 04:31
So far the liberal thinkers have only responded with crude remarks. They just don't like these kinds of questions - it hurts their brains. "Oh he doesn't think like us, make him go away he's evil!"

Have you been ignoring me? I have made some very good points.
Kudos to the post about the flip-flops. Very well done.
J0eg0d
19-10-2004, 04:31
Where the fuck has anyone suggested that Bush knew 3,000 people were going to die and did nothing about it? There's a big difference between suggesting that Bush is incompetent and saying that he's guilty of sitting idly by and doing nothing when he knew something was going to happen. Bush is certainly incompetent--I'm not ready to say he's the kind of monster who would have 3,000 civilians killed for political gain.
flip flopping hypocrite
Sleepytime Villa
19-10-2004, 04:32
Fuck if I'm reading all that. Next time just give us a link. Spammer.
like you would have looked at a link that might force you to open you obviuosly tightly squeezed eyes...and besides i said i got it from another post..you gotta repeat the obvious to look better than you are?

have you looked up any of that ..i have...looks like proof to me..
Incertonia
19-10-2004, 04:41
flip flopping hypocrite
Prove it. I've been very clear in what I've said, and I dare say I've got a way better reputation around this joint than you do.
Skepticism
19-10-2004, 04:46
and you recieve a memo that reads; "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US”

What do you do?

I do what Clinton did.
Dettibok
19-10-2004, 05:07
Where the fuck has anyone suggested that Bush knew 3,000 people were going to die and did nothing about it?Given J0eg0d's response: "flip flopping hypocrite", I would guess that he hallucinated you saying so. I wonder what he thinks I said?
Kaitoupia
19-10-2004, 05:31
I'd give you points for your research/copy and paste skills. However, you chose the WRONG thread. This is not a Kerry flipflop thread.

Wrong thread, maybe, but someone did ask for proof that Kerry had been flipflopping, and he provided it. In abundance. *wry grin* And how many people do click the links that pop up in threads? I do, but that doesn't mean everyone does. So please don't get mad at him for backing up his arguements. That's what debate is all about, right?




Now I'm going to present a question from another thread that's still valid in this one:

How many memos do you think the president gets in a day? A week? How many have titles similar to that? How many other terrorist organizations/independents (not political independents)/nations have it in for us or would like to have it in for us?

This issue is not black and white, people. The horse is dead. Quit beating it, please. Before PETA stops by...