NationStates Jolt Archive

Uust so we know where the Democratic party stands on Iraq, let's observe what their Presidential candidate is saying. John Kerry gave a speech (http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2005_10_26.html) at Georgetown University today, in which he offered the following brilliant insights on Iraq:

"When they [the Bush administration] could have listened to General Shinseki and put in enough troops to maintain order, they chose not to. They were wrong."

He continued

"General George Casey, our top military commander in Iraq, recently told Congress that our large military presence 'feeds the notion of occupation' and 'extends the amount of time that it will take for Iraqi security forces to become self-reliant.' . . . It is essential to acknowledge that the insurgency will not be defeated unless our troop levels are drawn down."

Apparently Kerry was for more troops before he was against it.

Apparently Kerry was for more troops before he was against it.

All in the same speech!

So-all you cats out there with Way Back Machines keep this in mind when you plan on going back and finally voting in last November's elections.


Though that seems pretty clear that he is saying that if we had the right amount to start with we'd be able to pull more out now. But hey...

Though that seems pretty clear that he is saying that if we had the right amount to start with we'd be able to pull more out now. But hey...

It's pretty clear to an old military hand that after an operation screws up, you can always go back and play Monday morning quarterback...

So-all you cats out there with Way Back Machines keep this in mind when you plan on going back and finally voting in last November's elections.


Though that seems pretty clear that he is saying that if we had the right amount to start with we'd be able to pull more out now. But hey...

Shhhhh. They're Bush apologists. Complex ideas frighten and confuse them...hence why the followed Bush in the first place.

Uust so we know where the Democratic party stands on Iraq, let's observe what their Presidential candidate is saying. John Kerry gave a speech (http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2005_10_26.html) at Georgetown University today, in which he offered the following brilliant insights on Iraq:

He continued

Apparently Kerry was for more troops before he was against it.



Gee. Didn't know that JK was still the Presidential Candidate or even the official mouthpiece of party opinion on all matters anymore!


Shouldn't someone tell the rest of the party this news?


They might find it interesting!!!


You know - after they picked themselves up off the floor and stopped laughing at you.....

Gee. Didn't know that JK wa still the Presidential Candidate or even the official mouthpiece of party opinion on all matters anymore!


He's trying really hard to be just that. NPR All Things Considered gave him a long, long softball interview yesterday where he covered the same topics that were in that speech.

At least NPR seems to be giving him free air time. At least 20 minutes of unhindered speaking, and softball questions.

It's pretty clear to an old military hand that after an operation screws up, you can always go back and play Monday morning quarterback...
Now wait-is the issue Monday Night Quarterbacking or the whole flip floping thing? Because you guys started off on the whole "For it before I was against it" thing. I just want to be straight, now.

Gee. Didn't know that JK was still the Presidential Candidate or even the official mouthpiece of party opinion on all matters anymore!


Shouldn't someone tell the rest of the party this news?


They might find it interesting!!!


You know - after they picked themselves up off the floor and stopped laughing at you.....
You're right, the real party head is Bill and Hillary Clinton. Back in the days when things made more sense, the candidate that the convention nominated to run for the Presidency also was the figurative, if not actual, head of the party until the next nomination/election cycle.

As a potential candidate for the 2008 nomination and as a U.S. Senator, Kerry is very much a spokesman for the national party.

He's trying really hard to be just that. NPR All Things Considered gave him a long, long softball interview yesterday where he covered the same topics that were in that speech.

At least NPR seems to be giving him free air time. At least 20 minutes of unhindered speaking, and softball questions.


Except that he's NOT that and you know it. And if NPR panders to Democrats then they're just the counterpoint to Fox.


Neither of which makes the original statements attempting to tie this to the party as a whole or referring to JK as their current candidate any more laughable.

2004 is over.

You won.

Get over it already!

Now wait-is the issue Monday Night Quarterbacking or the whole flip floping thing? Because you guys started off on the whole "For it before I was against it" thing. I just want to be straight, now.

Both. He's flip-flopping within the same speech, which is amusing, but old.

Yesterday on NPR All Things Considered, he had an in-depth review of the strategy in Iraq, and said he would have "done things differently".

Oh, I'm sure. Now that we all know exactly how things played out, I'm sure that almost anyone could come up with a better plan.

As I recall, Kerry voted for this thing. If he had a great idea on how to win it, why didn't he mention it then?

Now wait-is the issue Monday Night Quarterbacking or the whole flip floping thing? Because you guys started off on the whole "For it before I was against it" thing. I just want to be straight, now.
I enjoy the flip-flop aspect of the speech. I also like getting in digs at Mr. Nuance from time to time.

Both. He's flip-flopping within the same speech, which is amusing, but old.
Okay, then I still have an unanswered response to that, then.

Yesterday on NPR All Things Considered, he had an in-depth review of the strategy in Iraq, and said he would have "done things differently".

Oh, I'm sure. Now that we all know exactly how things played out, I'm sure that almost anyone could come up with a better plan.

As I recall, Kerry voted for this thing. If he had a great idea on how to win it, why didn't he mention it then?
Ah, now this. Seems to mention the guy who actually did have a plan for that in the speech, and is really asking why they didn't listen to that guy because he was in a position to know. Certainly after something goes wrong you spend a little time looking into why so you don't do it again. I mean, unless you like making the same mistake over and over again. But again, maybe that's just me...

As a potential candidate for the 2008 nomination and as a U.S. Senator, Kerry is very much a spokesman for the national party.


Interesting.

So are you saying that any Republican Senator who opens their vacuuous yap and drops a bone is also speaking for the whole party? Because they might elect to become a candidate for the '08 nomination?

And let's be honest - more Presidents get elected from Governoprships than the Senate, so should I be scouring for any possible stupidity said by Republican governors and ascribe them too the whole part too?


Think I'll find any?




I actually try to point and laugh at the individuals involved rather than make some spurious smear attempt on whole party's when someone says something stupid.... it's just a little more honest than your way.

He's saying that they should've gone in with more troops in the first place, and they didn't listen. He's also saying that the only way to get out of it now is to pull more troops out.

Seems to me that a few of you (I need not name names) are just knocking the guy for the hell of it. That, or you're mentally deficient.

Okay, then I still have an unanswered response to that, then.

Ah, now this. Seems to mention the guy who actually did have a plan for that in the speech, and is really asking why they didn't listen to that guy because he was in a position to know. Certainly after something goes wrong you spend a little time looking into why so you don't do it again. I mean, unless you like making the same mistake over and over again. But again, maybe that's just me...

When Kerry was on NPR yesterday, he said he would have "done things differently" while describing what he would have done only in the vaguest of terms. And then declaring that his method would have been a success. No mention of more troops at the beginning, and pulling out sooner in that interview - just "I would have done a better job".

Thanks Einstein Kerry. I'm sure that you had that plan in your pocket when you voted to approve the war - you just kept it in your back pocket, and didn't share it with us until the whole thing blew up in our faces, and you got this sweet interview on NPR.

At the very least, when you voted for the war, you could have gone public with your great plan if Bush didn't want to consult with you. But you didn't.

So I wonder about plans that are cooked up after all is said and done.

Oh Christ, is he still fucking talking? Are we still fucking listening?

When Kerry was on NPR yesterday, he said he would have "done things differently" while describing what he would have done only in the vaguest of terms. And then declaring that his method would have been a success. No mention of more troops at the beginning, and pulling out sooner in that interview - just "I would have done a better job".

Thanks Einstein Kerry. I'm sure that you had that plan in your pocket when you voted to approve the war - you just kept it in your back pocket, and didn't share it with us until the whole thing blew up in our faces, and you got this sweet interview on NPR.

At the very least, when you voted for the war, you could have gone public with your great plan if Bush didn't want to consult with you. But you didn't.

So I wonder about plans that are cooked up after all is said and done.
But wait, we're talking about this speech, where he said this:
When they [the Bush administration] could have listened to General Shinseki and put in enough troops to maintain order, they chose not to. They were wrong.
So it seems that at least part of his plan was "Listen to this guy," and part of what that guy was saying was "more troops." So at least in the speech we see what he would have done differently.

Uust so we know where the Democratic party stands on Iraq, let's observe what their Presidential candidate is saying. John Kerry gave a speech (http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2005_10_26.html) at Georgetown University today. Apparently Kerry was for more troops before he was against it.
Kerry couldn't find his frakkin' ass with both hands when he was in the Navy. That, apparently, has not changed. :rolleyes:

Every time John McCain opens his mouth, he gets noticed. He's a past and possible candidate for President. I guarantee, if he had said something like "We should have had more troops before we had fewer", his words would have been plastered all over the news.

How long have you been watching Presidential politics, anyway?
Interesting.

So are you saying that any Republican Senator who opens their vacuuous yap and drops a bone is also speaking for the whole party? Because they might elect to become a candidate for the '08 nomination?

And let's be honest - more Presidents get elected from Governoprships than the Senate, so should I be scouring for any possible stupidity said by Republican governors and ascribe them too the whole part too?


Think I'll find any?




I actually try to point and laugh at the individuals involved rather than make some spurious smear attempt on whole party's when someone says something stupid.... it's just a little more honest than your way.

All in the same speech!

And that takes talent :D

Oh Christ, is he still fucking talking? Are we still fucking listening?

Well it is a slow news day (for the most part). We do need something to laugh about and Kerry provided it.

Thanks Kerry.

Every time John McCain opens his mouth, he gets noticed. He's a past and possible candidate for President. I guarantee, if he had said something like "We should have had more troops before we had fewer", his words would have been plastered all over the news.

Yes. He gets noticed. As does Kerry. That is not the point in case you haven't noticed. I have no problem with you making fun of JKs statements as they relate to him.

Because what doesn't get said of McCaain is that he IS the current nominee or that he speaks for the Republican party as a whole. He gets praised or criticized as an individual.

You, on the other, explicitely called this the position of the entire Democratic party as stated by their current nominee - which is pure, unadulterated bullshit.



How long have you been watching Presidential politics, anyway?

Longer than you by the looks of it.

Because what doesn't get said of McCaain is that he IS the current nominee or that he speaks for the Republican party as a whole. He gets praised or criticized as an individual.

When did McCain get nominated to be the Republican Nominee for President?
`

Yes. He gets noticed. As does Kerry. That is not the point in case you haven't noticed. I have no problem with you making fun of JKs statements as they relate to him.

Because what doesn't get said of McCaain is that he IS the current nominee or that he speaks for the Republican party as a whole. He gets praised or criticized as an individual.

You, on the other, explicitely called this the position of the entire Democratic party as stated by their current nominee - which is pure, unadulterated bullshit.





Longer than you by the looks of it.
You seem to be confused. Sorry about that.

When did McCain get nominated to be the Republican Nominee for President?
`


He hasn't. And JK's tenure in that position ended a year ago next week. My objection to Myrmidonisia is not making fun of JK. Heck, that can be an official national pastime with it's own holiday as far as I care.

I just took objection with his opening line which stated: "Just so we know where the Democratic party stands on Iraq, let's observe what their Presidential candidate is saying.

JK's comments are his own - not that of the party, nor is he their candidate anymore. Trying to say that he is either is blatantly rediculous.