Posted on 08/31/2004 11:11:21 AM PDT by ejdrapes
Bush: Against Winning War on Terror Before He Was For It, Says Kerry-Edwards 2004 To: National Desk, Political Reporter Contact: Chad Clanton or Phil Singer, both of Kerry-Edwards 2004, 202-464-2800; Web: http://www.johnkerry.com WASHINGTON, Aug. 31 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following was released today by Kerry-Edwards 2004: BUSH FLIP-FLOPS ON WINNING THE WAR ON TERROR: Kerry spokesman Phil Singer said: "What today showed is that George Bush might be able to read a speech saying we can win the war on terror, but as we saw yesterday, he's clearly got real doubts about his ability to do so and with good reason. "This President has gone from mission accomplished to mission miscalculated to mission impossible on the war on terror. We need a leader who knows we can win the war on terror and has a plan to do it. America can do better than a go-it-alone foreign policy that has alienated key allies, leaving U.S. troops bearing the overwhelming burden in Iraq and U.S. taxpayers shouldering the bulk of the cost." BUSH ON THE ATTACK BECAUSE, CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS RECORD BUSH DISTORTS KERRY POSITION ON REDEPLOYMENT Bush Distorts Kerry's Position. While the Bush campaign continues to distort Kerry's position, Kerry in fact believes that now would be a dangerous time to pull troops out of nuclear- armed North Korea and further fray our alliances in Europe at a time when we need them more then ever. Bush and Cheney themselves have pointed to the need to keep our troops in the Korean Peninsula. What Kerry said in early August was: "IF THE DIPLOMACY THAT I BELIEVE CAN BE PUT IN PLACE CAN WORK, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world. In the Korean peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps." Unfortunately, with Bush's failures in Korea and with our alliances around the world, we don't have the diplomacy right at this point. (This Week, August 1, 2004) Bush: "And I'm not -- I strongly believe we need to have a military presence in the Korea Peninsula, not only to keep the peace in Peninsula, but to keep regional stability. And I strongly believe we need to keep a presence in NATO." (Bush, 10/11/00) Cheney Said Danger Posed By North Korea Requires U.S. Presence. Cheney: "'In view of the dangers of nuclear proliferation in North Korea and the destabilizing impact on Northeast Asia -- and as a result of our consultations -- we have concluded that it would be unwise to proceed with major U.S. force reduction,' he said. 'We have therefore postponed the next round of force level adjustments being considered for Korea until the dangers and uncertainties of the North Korean nuclear program have been thoroughly addressed.'" (UPI, 11/21/91) BUSH THREATENED TO VETO $87 BILLION White House Threatened to Veto $87 Billion. The White House threatened to veto the $87 billion supplemental bill. 'If this provision is not removed, the president's senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill,' Joshua B. Bolten, the White House budget director, wrote in a letter to Congressional leaders." They also threatened a veto if full health benefits were given to TRICARE In a letter to Congressional conferees on the $87 billion bill, "In particular, if the President is presented a bill that authorizes concurrent receipt or military retirement pay and veterans disability compensation benefits, or expands TRICARE, then I would join other advisors to the President in recommending that he veto a bill." (Rumsfeld letter, 7/6/03; New York Times, 10/22/03) BUSH SENT TROOPS INTO HARM'S WAY WITHOUT EQUIPMENT Even in Mid-June, Soldiers Lacking Armored Vehicles. "The problem with unarmored Humvees in combat situations continues to be an issue. In early March, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, questioned Acting Secretary of the Army Les Brownlee about the shortage of body armor and fortified Humvees for troops serving in Iraq. Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said after a visit to Iraq in mid-June that U.S. forces still need better armored equipment. Of the 15,000 Humvees in Iraq, about 1,500 to 2,000 are armored, according to the Army." On General who was in Iraq said, "we're short of the proper body armor. Everybody had flack jackets and some body armor, but not the new body armor. They showed us the schedule, and said it was going to be done. They was short at that time, I believe, around 1,400 up-armored Humvees that were coming into the country, and the body armor was on schedule. So these shortage will drastically come down, but it does leave you wondering why couldn't we have done this before the war, and we simply didn't." (CNN, 3/14/04; Portland Press Herald, 7/2/04) KERRY AGREES WITH POWELL ON FLAG AMENDMENT Kerry believes in protecting the flag AND the first amendment. As such, he advocates for penalizing flag desecration, but not via a constitutional amendment. Gen. Colin Powell on a Flag Burning Amendment: In a letter to Senator Patrick Leahy, Powell wrote: "I love our flag, our Constitution and our country with a love that has no bounds. I defended all three for 35 years as a soldier and was willing to give my life in their defense. I understand how strongly so many of my fellow veterans and citizens feel about the flag and I understand the powerful sentiment in state legislatures for such an amendment. I feel the same sense of outrage. But I step back from amending the Constitution to relieve that outrage. .. If I were a member of Congress, I would not vote for the proposed amendment and would fully understand and respect the views of those who would. For or against, we all love our flag with equal devotion. ( Letter to Senator Patrick Leahy, 3-18-1999) John Kerry on Penalizing Flag Desecration: "As a former prosecutor I know that most flag burning incidents can be prosecuted under existing law. If a person burns a flag that belongs to the Federal Government -- that constitutes destruction of Federal property, which is a crime." (Congressional Record, 12-12-95) John Kerry on Amending the Constitution: "The Constitution has been amended only 16 times in the 198 years since the Bill of Rights was ratified. No amendment has ever limited the Bill of Rights itself." (Congressional Record, 6-26-90) --- Paid for by Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.
Who is managing this campaign? PeeWee Herman? "I know you are, but what am I?" ROTFL! Can't they come up with anything original?
Bush just left the bait, and the two John's fell for it, hook, line and sinker. He forced them to admit they are also for the war. Anyone with half a brain knows what President Bush really meant.
Is this the "talking points memo" that is given to the biased press everyday? I always wondered what that looked like.
Kerry is a liar.
Bush comments taken out of context.
There will always be terrorists, that was Bush's point. But we will continue to fight them and free people and protect.
But Kerry does not understand this, since he is one of them.
Brilliant. Remind voters of Kerry's definitional flip-flop while you're trying to pin that label on Bush. This follows the typical Dem spin: when you call them liars, they don’t disagree, claim, “well, you guys lie too!”
Kerry has the worse "war room" going. Thankfully. :-)
Yeah, this press release is laughable. It is so stretched that only the most hard core brain-dead lefty is going to believe it. What the kerry campaign is obviously trying to do is take criticisms directed at them, and turn them around at Bush. For that to work you have to believe in moral equivalency, a liberal mind-rot. For people who believe in right and wrong this tactic will never succeed.
I think what he said was realistic, because unless you kill off every last terrorist, they will still exist and keep coming back.
A_R
Let's admit it was a mistake on Bush's part to say what he said. However, the good news is that it's recoverable.
They are hitting the panic button.
The short answer: No.
And when they do try to be original, they flip flop and forget what they said before. LOL
Edwards and Kerry look so freakin desperate, and that they don't SEE this shows how rapidly the wheels are coming off.
Bush has a history of garb;ed communication, but when I heard the clip I thought "I don't see the objection."
Any rational person would agree that all Bush was saying is that this is not a traditional war, etc. This is not a change in policy; it's merely an observation on the war, and the type of war. It could even be called nuanced.
Edwards looks like a jerk spouting off about it, but since he's added absolutley nothing to the Kerry numbers he is desperate to be seen as a part of the team. But all he will do is give the base the sense that they are in desperate times.
Polls and press can't cut through the very noticeable malaise settling down over the dems. Trolls and worriers can talk down the truth all they like, but this pathetic attempt at spin only shows that Kerry is dropping like a rock.
Wonder if Chad Clanton will still have a job next week..
"Wonder if Chad Clanton will still have a job next week."
A former Clanton Gang did not fare so well at the "OK Corral."
Exactly. Number One Rule of political communication is never call attention to your own weakness. These guys are just unbelievable. Just when you think they learn from their mistakes, they do something even more stupid. What is this - a campaign run by a bunch of amateurs? No seasoned political pro would put out a statement like this one, that's for sure. Every day with Deadwards is like a gift from the Campaign Gods - it always keeps getting better.
Especially since Edwards' strategy for the War on Terror is to give nuclear fuel to the mad mullahs of Tehran. These guys are unbelievable.
LOL!!! Kerry thinks we have troops in North Korea? What a maroon!
And a weak and ineffective full force it is. Snicker.
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.