[Piquaboy]

The lying SOS seems to have a lot of those moments.

[EllaMinnow]

"It was just a very inarticulate way of saying something and I had one of those inarticulate moments," Kerry said in an interview broadcast Wednesday on "Good Morning America" on ABC. "But it reflects the truth of the position ... I thought that the wealthiest people of America should share in that burden. It was a protest."

Yada, yada, yada...not nearly as smart as he thinks he is.

[goldstategop]

John F*ckin's entire life is an exercise in the power of inarticulation. And we're supposed to believe Republicans are the ones who are dumb.

[bluecollarman]

"It was a protest."

Still protesting after all these years.

[jwalsh07]

One can not explain the unexplainable. He voted against funding our brothers in arms during a war. 33 years ago he stereotyped his brothers in arms as baby killing, drug addled whackjobs in the service of "Jehngis" Khan.

Its pretty clear that self aggrandization trumps the troops in John Kerrys case. Anybody voting for this asshole needs his head examined.

[ladtx]

We should not have gone into Iraq knowing today what we know," Kerry told ABC.

Oh, I get it now. Why didn't he say that before. But then I still would have been in the dark because I flunked Crystal Ball Gazing 101. If GW had only been able to see into the future and known then what we know today. Sigh---Just too nuanced for me I suppose.

[Arrowhead1952]

"We should not have gone into Iraq knowing today what we know," Kerry told ABC.

I guess Skerry thinks he can see into the future ping. Talk about being disconnected with reality, this tops them all.

[PilloryHillary]

After all of this time, this is all he can come up with to explain his position? Kerry voted NO on a bill to fund the troops who are fighting a war. That sucks. That's all the voters need to know.

[tomnbeverly]

Bottom line: The Vietnam war was unpopular at home however, we did not have senators on the hill making protest votes on funding that war. How would you have liked it if your swiftboat had sunk because senators on the hill protested by not funding needed supply parts to support you in combat?
The simple fact that you were actually in combat and know the danger first hand makes your vote for no funds a true testiment to your flawed character. Your position is viewed as a radical leftist position and you therefore have no business seeking the office of Commander In Chief.

[MortMan]

"It was just a very inarticulate way of saying something and I had one of those inarticulate moments," Kerry said in an interview broadcast Wednesday on "Good Morning America" on ABC. "But it reflects the truth of the position ... I thought that the wealthiest people of America should share in that burden. It was a protest."

At the time, he claimed that the "NO" was due to the money not being partially structured as a loan. Somebody wrap this dude in wire and put big magnets around him - we could power the whole frickin' world with the way he "spins" and flip-flops!!! (Not to mention his flip on the "would you vote the same NOW' question)

[pookie18]

The AP story "overlooked" the fact that Kerry was on TV a few weeks before the vote stating that anyone who voted against it would be irresponsible. Personally, I agree with him (on that one thing ;-)

[sinkspur]

We should not have gone into Iraq knowing today what we know," Kerry told ABC.

And, knowing today what we know, we could have stopped 9/11.

Does Kerry even realize how ridiculous he is?

[Cruz]

The article quotes John Kerry as rationalizing his vote against funding support for our men and women in combat as a "protest." While Americans are in the midst of war in a faraway land, in need of all the basic necessities of life, in need of ammo, body armor, vehicle armor, intel, ....John Kerry, the International Man of Mystery, "protests" and votes against American soldiers and Marines. He is truly a class act.

[cvq3842]

It was a protest against Dean leading him in the run-up to the primaries! I know I'm one of those dumb conservatives who does't understand "nuances," but I do think it's that simple. In all fairness (barf alert!), maybe he did know the aid package was going to pass anyway. But votes send signals - it's a chance for a representative to take a stand. Kerry did - a thumb to the nose, aimed at our troops. Now he wants to run away from it. Neither stance is acceptable in a leader.

And on his vote for the Iraq war - I'm so tired of hearing Kerry's "explanation" of his vote to authorize force in Iraq as "a vote for a process." Show me where the heck he said that at the time of the vote! No, for years he said we had to deal with Saddam, disarmng him by force and "going it alone" (i.e., without France and Germany) if necessary. The way he tells it now, he voted to give Bush the authority go go to war "only as a last resort" - in other words, this "explanation," cooked up long after the fact, passes the buck to Bush and allows Kerry to try to have it both ways. Imagine if Bush did NOT go to war, and it was politically advantageous for Kerry to keep up his pro-war stance. Would he have said "well, I left the decision to Bush, to initiate a process" or would Kerry be shouting from the rooftops that he wanted a war but that Bush had failed to follow his advice?

What utter garbage! (Not the word I wanted to use, believe me.) Leaders lead, not hide behind others or tack with the wind. that's why Kerry will never be a leader, I hope, of anything important. It's infuriating! Then again, I hope we can look back on his campaign and just laugh.

[OldFriend]

LOL.....just heard a soundbite on WABC radio news......Kerry said Americans want the President to concentrate on solving their problems rather than clearing brush on his ranch.

This from a man who has not attended his senate duties for over a year and when he has free time he windsurfs???????????????????

[ModelBreaker]

said in an interview that his explanation of why he voted in favor of additional funding for the war in Iraq (news - web sites) before voting against it was "one of those inarticulate moments" in the campaign.

So true, so true.

[mrs9x]

Kerry told ABC. "Knowing there was no imminent threat to America, knowing there were no weapons of mass destruction, knowing there was no connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein, I would not have voted to support war."

Here's another flip-flop...He said in August that he would have supported the war even if he had known that Saddam did NOT have WMDs. This guy is all over the map. It's just delusional.

[areafiftyone]

He was freaking protesting? HOW DARE HE EVEN THINK OF PROTESTING ANYTHING WHEN IT COMES TO FUNDING OUR TROOPS! And he has the nerve to call himself a hero! He's a traitor to our country and should be treated as such!

[trebb]

I thought that the wealthiest people of America should share in that burden. It was a protest."

And his treasonous activities during the 70s were "protests" too.

How sick that he won't see that throwing a hissy because he wants to raise taxes is not a valid reason to vote to leave our military dangling in the breeze...

[Mister Baredog]

I see the AP is still flacking for sKerry.

Where's the referral to sKerry's own words. He said it would be totally irresponsible for a Senator to not vote to fund the war effort, two weeks later he did just that.

It should make a great TV ad, say around Oct 20 or so, LOL.