Kerry Speech

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by hayley

he was kicking ass and taking names, especially in regards to the war in Iraq. It was great.

I guess I was watching a different speech. He glossed over his own record on Iraq (he was vehement that Iraq had WMD), which he's gotta know is the sticking point with undecided, anti-war voters. It was actually rather disappointing. At least defend it. But, no, he acted like it was unimportant. It's easy enough to tear the other guy down; it's a little harder to explain your own position.

Overall the speech was decent, not great. Hell, if I were basing my vote on the best speech, Rev. Al would get my vote. He fired up the crowd more than Kerry did. Kerry was short on how he plans to accomplish what he claims he will accomplish, but that is not unusual for this sort of speech.

No doubt the country will be better off if Kerry wins, but long term, unless he takes a very different tack from Clinton, we are going to continue our dangerous slide to the right. I notice that his campaign has been surrounding itself with the old Clinton gang, much like Dubya did with Reagan and Bush I types. We need to move forward, not constantly look back. Looking back is only useful as far as ensuring that you don't repeat the same mistakes. John Kerry already failed at that by voting for the Iraq war.

I hope he wins and I hope I am wrong about the kind of presidency he will give us. But I don't see it happening.

John Kerry would get my vote if he admitted he made a mistake, apologized to the families of the dead servicemen and women and pledged to withdraw from Iraq within six months of taking office.

The episode in which he saved his comrade from certain death in the Mekong waters says a lot about Kerry as man. Unfortunately so does his vote to allow the Bush administraton to attack Iraq.

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by skcin

My favorite part (I swear I yelled "YES!") was when he said "we need to stop opening up fire stations in Bahgdad & closing them in the United States."

You yelled YES and I muttered, "You should have thought of that before voting to attack Iraq."

[CarneVaca]

Kucinich 88
Kerry 73
Bush 6

They really need to update this for the general election.

[jwys_soapbox]

My results were not surprising (except that they still have Kucinich on the list of candidates):

Kerry 86%
Kucinich 80%
Bush 6%

[Patti]

He'll have opportunity enough to explain his voting record re: the war during the debates.

Carne, as far as promising to withdraw the troops within 6 months--I don't think he should promise that. We are there and need to finish the job. What Kerry has talked about is a coalition to come in (if he could get one together) and relieve some of our troops. But we can't just pull out of there without a sound exit strategy. It would make things even worse than they are now. We're kind of stuck for the time being IMO.

[skcin]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

You yelled YES and I muttered, "You should have thought of that before voting to attack Iraq."

Point taken, but I think that line meant just because the US is at war in another country doesn't mean we should forget about our own country's problems.

And how come we have all kinds of extra $$$ for NASA but not enough for SSI, healthcare, etc, etc.

Paula

[Merf]

I know I'm a bit late with this, but I took this presidential match thing again and I'm still getting Kucinich as my #1 candidate, I think it's because of my huge support of environmental issues.

Kerry 78%
Bush 4%

This is Bush's "stance" on the Environment. This alone (on top of a MILLION other things) cost him my vote:

Environment
Oil Drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge -Strongly Favor
Mandatory Clean Air Emissions Standards -Somewhat Opposes
Tougher Fuel Efficiency Standards -Strongly Opposes

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by Patti

He'll have opportunity enough to explain his voting record re: the war during the debates.

Have you seen what passes for a debate in the last two or three elections?

Carne, as far as promising to withdraw the troops within 6 months--I don't think he should promise that. We are there and need to finish the job. What Kerry has talked about is a coalition to come in (if he could get one together) and relieve some of our troops. But we can't just pull out of there without a sound exit strategy. It would make things even worse than they are now. We're kind of stuck for the time being IMO.

Sorry, but you don't know that leaving right now would make matters worse. Nobody does. The fearmongers would have us believe that all hell will break lose. Well, hasn't it already? We simply don't know what kind of chaos would happen if we left Iraq or whether it would be worse than the current chaos and the chaos that is likely to continue as long as we remain there. While we had the ability to predict what would happen if we attacked Iraq, and some predicted exactly what is happening, the situation has now become way too confusing and murky to try and guess what could happen if we left cold. Like it or not, our troops will be pulled out, either slowly as is happening now, or we do it right: Pull out at once and pay reparations. It would be cheaper to do that.

All we need to do to understand this is to study the experience of other empires throughout history. My own native country was an empire. Ever since it finally let go of the last colonies in the 1970s, it has not had any reason to go to war at all (save for token presences in American-led conflicts, such as the Gulf War, which it would not have gotten into otherwise.) And guess what? It is a far more prosperous and stable country as a result. Empires are doomed to fail.

From a strictly economic standpoint, we need to cut and run. This Iraq misadventure is a disaster the lingering proportions of which are not trivial:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...407299971db045

The damage is done. The end of empire is near. Why insist on prolonging the agony? There's absolutely no possible positive outcome of this Iraq misadventure. John Kerry should know better.

Incidentally, Teresa Heinz-Kerry was born in what was then a colony of the empire I mentioned above. She knows first-hand that empires are doomed to fail. You'd think she would have advised her hubby accordingly before he placed that fatal vote on the war on Iraq.

[Patti]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

Have you seen what passes for a debate in the last two or three elections?



Sorry, but you don't know that leaving right now would make matters worse. Nobody does. The fearmongers would have us believe that all hell will break lose. Well, hasn't it already? We simply don't know what kind of chaos would happen if we left Iraq or whether it would be worse than the current chaos and the chaos that is likely to continue as long as we remain there. While we had the ability to predict what would happen if we attacked Iraq, and some predicted exactly what is happening, the situation has now become way too confusing and murky to try and guess what could happen if we left cold. Like it or not, our troops will be pulled out, either slowly as is happening now, or we do it right: Pull out at once and pay reparations. It would be cheaper to do that.

All we need to do to understand this is to study the experience of other empires throughout history. My own native country was an empire. Ever since it finally let go of the last colonies in the 1970s, it has not had any reason to go to war at all (save for token presences in American-led conflicts, such as the Gulf War, which it would not have gotten into otherwise.) And guess what? It is a far more prosperous and stable country as a result. Empires are doomed to fail.

From a strictly economic standpoint, we need to cut and run. This Iraq misadventure is a disaster the lingering proportions of which are not trivial:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...407299971db045

The damage is done. The end of empire is near. Why insist on prolonging the agony? There's absolutely no possible positive outcome of this Iraq misadventure. John Kerry should know better.

Incidentally, Teresa Heinz-Kerry was born in one of the what was then a colony of the empire I mentioned above. She knows first-hand that empires are doomed to fail. You'd think she would have advised her hubby accordingly before he placed that fatal vote on the war on Iraq.

Yes Carne, I know the debates aren't the be-all and end-all, but I think his voting record on the war and on the no vote for the $87 billion in aid for the troops will be a hot topic. He'll probably spin his way around the questions, as any recent politician is wont to do. So I guess I kind of agree with you. Shock!

And you're right, I DON'T know what the outcome would be if we withdrew the troops immediately. I was simply voicing my opinion that things would be worse in Iraq. You could be entirely right. And from an economic standpoint ITA agree with you. We would be better served to cut and run. But I still don't think Kerry should PROMISE to withdraw within 6 months. If he reneged, it would be political suicide. Just being politically pragmatic here.

[DeeGeMe]

Here's how I knew that Kerry had given a great speech--the commentators on CNN & MSNBC were stunned into silence for a long period after the speech was over. If you can get Chris Matthews to shut up--you know you've accomplished something! Then, all they could find to criticize him with was that his delivery of the speech was too fast! I guess they couldn't quibble with the content so they had to find fault with the delivery.

[CarneVaca]

Originally Posted by DeeGeMe

Here's how I knew that Kerry had given a great speech--the commentators on CNN & MSNBC were stunned into silence for a long period after the speech was over. If you can get Chris Matthews to shut up--you know you've accomplished something!

Do you really think that's what happened!? They always do that. It is common practice to let the guy have his moment while the crowd reacts. Besides, CNN was too busy broadcasting the frantic urgings of the convention organizer to drop more balloons. What the hell were they thinking to keep the guy's mic on?

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

Kucinich 88
Kerry 73
Bush 6

They really need to update this for the general election.

Well supposedly, they actually asked the presidential candidates the same questions...and your answers based on their answers is where they came from...and they started it when the primaries were going on.

Chris

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by ShangriLaTroubl

estranged...i was undecided for the longest time myself...but no longer..it is very clear to me which candidate (out of the two main ones) reflects what I believe mostly...and that's Kerry..

I loved John Kerry saying "Teddy Roosevelt wouldnt have been able to do this in his speech....but I want to tell you to find out more information on the issues visit johnkerry.com "

I do encourage that..if you haven't...visit Johnkerry.com it gives clear, and thought out points on MANY MANY issues that we all hold true to us...

Another suggestion..a very good site to go to : Presidential Match

That site is very cool...you are given a questionarre concerning your feelings on numerous issues...and in the end it tells you which candidate you are most compatible with on the issues...in a percentage...very cool..you should try it...everyone should try it...

Chris

Welcome to The Dark Side, Chris.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by hayley

It was a great speech. I too wish that he'd addressed his voting record as well, I'm tired of having to defend it, but still- he was kicking ass and taking names, especially in regards to the war in Iraq. It was great. So many view him as not being a strong leader in that regard- and I think both him tonight and Clinton on Monday (strength & wisdom are not mutually exclusive) did much to turn that around.

I think that's why he directed everyone to the web site. If he had to explain his Senate votes to us, we would have had a reprise of the '72 convention where McGovern accepted the nomination at 3 o'clock in the morning.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Welcome to The Dark Side, Chris.

Thanks..glad to be here...now i have just have to change my voter registration over..lol . I actually still do carry what many consider "Republican values," but I think I always just considered myself that because so much of my family does and it was like the thing to be ya know? The biggest thing always holding me back was the abortion issue, and then I finally just decided you know what, I'm not a woman, I could never know what thats like, and I cannot let that one issue hold me back....so that's that. I really do BELIEVE (i know many ppl say that) but I do believe John Kerry has a great vision for the future...sure you can knit pick anyones voting record, but for me the real clear choice is Kerry....I think he plans to do A LOT of great things for college students, and Bush plans to cut college programs to pay for his war...so thats one of the biggest things to me as well

Chris