It's pathetic. It's sore-loserism. But leave it to the Associated Press to enable its favorite political party to deny reality. |
Posted on 02/15/2005 7:39:58 AM PST by Phlap
WASHINGTON (AP) - Former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, who lost decisively to President Bush in an election focused on national security, said Tuesday the country would be "far better off" with his proposals for Iraq and the military. "I think my security proposals for the country were smack on, dead on," Kerry said. "I think that had they started to do the things I proposed on Iraq when I proposed them, we would be far better off today. And they are in fact now trying to do some of the things that I proposed.
The Massachusetts senator, meeting with defense reporters, discussed legislation he plans to introduce to permanently increase the size of the military and boost benefits for military families. It's largely the same proposal that Kerry put forth during the campaign. Several similar proposals also are being floated in Congress.
Reflecting on the presidential campaign, Kerry said he had proposed "a far more effective way to make America safer." And, he said, he was "way ahead of the curve" on several areas - like the position of an intelligence chief, the creation of the commission to investigate the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and an increase in the military death gratuity - while "the president dragged his feet."
"Americans accepted that I could be the commander in chief," he said. "What they were unwilling to do was shift commanders in midstream."
It's pathetic. It's sore-loserism. But leave it to the Associated Press to enable its favorite political party to deny reality. |
Kerry is a jerk!
Yep:
1. Who becomes DNC Chair is the most important election of the last 12 months
2. What Kerry says is treated far more seriously than what Nixon said in 1961, Goldwater in 1965, HHH in 1969, McGovern in 1973 etc.
No there is not an agenda here is there?
Kerry.....Kerry...Now, why does that name sound familiar?
>> "John Kerry, who lost decisively to President Bush" <<
>> "John Kerry, who lost decisively to President Bush" <<
>> "John Kerry, who lost decisively to President Bush" <
Hanoi John Effing Kerry seeking to be relevant?
His ideas are not ". . . smack on . . . ."!
He is on smack!
What a putz. Somebody should smack him along side the head. Of course, then he would demand a purple heart.
The only military proposal due on the table from Senator Kerry is his signed Form 180.
Oh my...it seems that the Senator is in great need of intense psychiatric therapy for his delusions. I think he really believes what he says and that the impressive rejection of him (and his "Plan" which he has yet to give any details of) by the majority of our great nation has pushed him over the edge. The guy is obviously nuts!!
LOL!
Why of course. Carl Rove was secretly cribbing your speeches and talking points throughout 2004. That's why GWB spanked Syria and Iran in the SOU, and why Condi has gone to Europe to promote liberty.
Why, John Kerry virtually invented international diplomacy.
Me too. Can I be your next VP?
Idiot. They were already doing most the stuff you floated. How the hell did you come so close to the office of President?
Talk about self-denial. I guess this is how he is able to face himself every day and not have to address the sad, traitoristic loser that stares back at him out of his mirror each day.
AP says he lost decisively? Someone tell Kerry the media is already in Clinton's pocket and he doesn't have a chance.
On second thought, let him make himself look like an idiot in the primaries.
Hey, I've got a really kick ass idea. John Kerry ought to RUN FOR PRESIDENT and see if America agrees with him.
I thought his plan was secret.
Kerry, just shut up.
I think it was 63.5 million. Kerry is planning a new video to be broadcast on Al Jazeera this afternoon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Is the AP going to treat this 20-year back-bencher as a serious player just because he ran for President and lost? It used to be that decorum required the loser to go off someplace and shut up, at least until the next election cycle. Now we have the Al Gore model of Not Going Away, in which the loser pretends that he won, and proceeds to tell the country what it ought to do.