Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Carl/NewsMax

>>> Where's the lie?

The state of Massachusetts is not responsible for responding to a nuclear war. The point of the EO was that it would be futile to spend money protecting people from something they cannot be protected from. Like I said in an another post, Kerry would respond to this by saying he is a fiscal conservative. It won't stick.


45 posted on 08/13/2004 7:34:45 AM PDT by jojodamofo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: jojodamofo
The state of Massachusetts is not responsible for responding to a nuclear war.

Not true. In Kerry's view at the time, the state of MA had limited responsibilities in the event of nuclear war, as the Kerry EO makes clear.

He outlined two choices in the EO. Education and prevention vs civil defense preparation. Kerry chose the first option, saying any defense against a nuclear attack was pointless.

What he would do as president, I have no idea. He hasn't spoken to the issue during the campaign.

But we do know that the only time he had responsibility for formulating a plan to respond to a nuclear strike, he said preparing a defense would only encourage an attack.

That's part of Kerry's record and the American people are entitled to draw whatever conclusions they deem appropriate.

53 posted on 08/13/2004 7:47:41 AM PDT by Carl/NewsMax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson