Posted on 09/30/2004 9:53:24 PM PDT by Salvation
How many gaffes/miustakes did Kerry make tonight?
Let's start a list!
You'd be surprised how many ice fishers there are!
If they aren't ice fishing maybe they are in the Mekong Delta or in Cambodia.
Weren't you surprised that Kerry even mentioned the word, VIETNAM?
The NYC subway did not close at all during the convention, according to a report on cable outlet NY1...
But there was this (which Kerry didn't mention of course):
Police in New York have arrested a US citizen and a Pakistani national on suspicion of plotting to blow up a subway station. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3608642.stm
Let me try this again:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3608642.stm
Yes, I'm surprised Kerry would dare try to even breathe a word about Vietnam/days of crime.
KERRY CLAIMS HE'S "NEVER, EVER" USED WORD "LYING" IN REFERENCE TO PRESIDENT BUSH ON IRAQ.
Shameless BTTT!
What about the one when Kerry said troops were pulled out of Afghanistan and sent to Iraq?
Is that true?
"The United Nations, Kofi Annan offered help after Baghdad fell. And we never picked him up on that and did what was necessary to transfer authority and to transfer reconstruction."
Rebuttal: The same way they administered the OIL FOR FOOD PROGRAM!
That is probably how it will turn out, and is going to be the silver-lining from this debate. Kerry's short-term strategy was to win the debate, which in technical terms, I think he did.
In summary I think the positives are:
1) The Bush campaign has some rich targets to work with regarding Kerry's statements on Iran nuclear materials, bi-lateral talks w/NK, the "global test" and his "consistent" positions.
2) Many of the subjects that were debated have been lost on much of the electorate up to this point. Now that they were exposed to them, they may take note when the Bush campaign re-visits the issues with a contrary viewpoint and facts.
3) The President's more forward-looking and big-picture stance in the debate has left him with nothing to apologize for, nothing to clarify, and nothing that contradicts his previous record.
Kerry: "Right now the president is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to research bunker-busting nuclear weapons. The United States is pursuing a new set of nuclear weapons. It doesn't make sense.
You talk about mixed messages. We're telling other people, "You can't have nuclear weapons," but we're pursuing a new nuclear weapon that we might even contemplate using.
Not this president. I'm going to shut that program down, and we're going to make it clear to the world we're serious about containing nuclear proliferation."
Actually, the nuclear weapon system referred to by Kerry in the debates is NOT new, but a mature weapon system. The B-61 nuclear weapons are free falling tactical nuke that have been around for many years. They come in 11 modifications or "Mods" that are improvements or refinements of the basic system.
The B-61 mod-11, referred to by Kerry in the debates, has been harden to penetrate the ground surface like underground bunkers. Kerry implies the U.S. is "pursuing a new set of nuclear weapons."
Wrong.
The B-61s nuclear weapons are an OLD "Set."
And I am wondering about the Cuban missile crisis statement.
Kerry debate gaffes ping
The Clinton Administration is responsible for N. Korea, Iran and Pakistan having Nuc's... not to mention giving China the technology that made this (and much more) possible.
**The Clinton Administration is responsible for N. Korea, Iran and Pakistan having Nuc's... not to mention giving China the technology that made this (and much more) possible.**
Bush follow up hopefully!
Don't forget that, according to Judicial Watch, Clinton, Gore and John Kerry all took money from China for their campaigns in 1996.
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.