Liberals call it "nuance" and sniff derisively at dolts who cannot comprehend it. But it is in the final analysis merely fluffy fecal frappe.
If a time is imposed on his meaningless ramblings, Kerry will get nervous and slip, perhaps accidentally actually reaching a conclusion about something. Kerry is too devious to be able to reach a bottom line honestly, so a halt midway through a dishonest convolution can end up anywhere. It might be interesting watching how chaos and randomicity generate new Kerry conclusions.
I can't remember the question, but Kerry was asked something and his answer was, 'maybe I would have. Yes, I might have."
What the hell does that mean?