Posted on 10/10/2004 1:26:50 PM PDT by blogblogginaway
Kerry: 'We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance'...
Perhaps the context meant that we should hope to get to the point where terrorism is not a grave threat, but I think that Senator Kerry's comment in view of his wife's comment in an interview with Chris Matthews in July of this year, provides an insight to their opinion that other countries have had to deal with this for a long time, why shouldn't we? It's the same line of thinking that says the US can't be trusted with nuclear bunker buster bombs. They have a deeply held belief that we are part of the problem, not the solution. It isn't fair that we are stronger. We should hinder our own capabilities so that we level the playing field.
Teresa Heinz Kerry: "On the other hand, the issue of terrorism, the issue of danger, is very close and has been throughout time to Europeans— you know the Irish, English, the French with all of the North African problems they had, the Basques in Spain— so this is not something that’s alien to them. And they don’t generally go out and blame other people; they just deal with it. "
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5511609/
I firmly believe that Kerry/Edwards don't want to crush the terrorists, they would rather play nice.
Nuance? This shows Kerry's utter lack of nuance. It requires mind-numingly dull telepone thick psychological and sociological treatises to explain exactly what is harmful about prostitution or gambling. Terrorists kill people, innocent children, dead and that is their sole purpose. A community can function just fine with an illicit gambling parlor or a massage parlor, behind a locked door with a little window so that those who never now what goes on has no idea what goes on. In fact, one could argue that communities have a hard time functioning without such outlets. While gambling and prostituion provide a relief valve for an otherwise oppressive society, terrorism serves no societal function whatsoever. None of us can live with a single terrorist in our midst - not one. You can argue the other side to gambling and prostitution. In fact, many communities have made the former legal and some of lagalized the latter. It would take a really wacked out liberal to legalize terrorism.
"Those silly Germans, they are such a nuisance."
Neville Chamberlain, 1939
are you a partisan politically motivated pajama wearing google monkey?
ha ha ha
Yes, and proud of it!
Thanks for a great idea ;-)
Isn't that known as the Clinton Doctrine?
bump
It is, in fact, a direct quote!
Got CBS?
It is just another example of zero convictions on Kerry's part. He says one thing to the NYT and quite another to middle Americans.
ROFLMPO!!
Kerry was a cop??
LOL
The Capt.
Issue: 03/16/04 -------------------------------------------
Kerry Will Abandon War on Terrorism
By Kenneth R. Timmerman
http://www.insightmag.com/news/2004/03/16/Politics/Kerry.Will.Abandon.War.On.Terrorism-621288.shtml
The Democratic Party's presidential front-runner, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), has pledged that if elected he will abandon the president's war on terror, begin a dialogue with terrorist regimes and apologize for three-and-one-half years of mistakes by the Bush administration.
In a sweeping foreign-policy address to the Council on Foreign Relations in December, Kerry called the U.S. war on terror as conceived and led by President George W. Bush "the most arrogant, inept, reckless and ideological foreign policy in modern history." Kerry's remarks were widely praised by journalists. The Associated Press headlined its report on his speech, "Kerry Vows to Repair Foreign Relations." The Knight Ridder news service noted that the new focus on foreign policy "plays to Kerry's strength." None of the major U.S. dailies found Kerry's unusually strident language at all inappropriate. "Kerry Vows to Change U.S. Foreign Policy; Senator Describes Steps He Would Take as President," the Washington Post headlined ponderously.
Presidential contenders have criticized sitting presidents in times of war before, but what's unique today is that "it has become the rule, not the exception," says Michael Franc, vice president for government relations at the Heritage Foundation. "With a few notable exceptions, you have almost the entire Democratic Party hierarchy that opposes what Bush is doing in the most vitriolic and emotional terms."
Heritage presidential historian Lee Edwards called it "not a foreign-policy analysis but a polemical speech, filled with inflammatory rhetoric that is disturbing and beyond the pale. What this suggests is that Mr. Kerry wants to take us back to President [Bill] Clinton and his U.N.-led multilateral policies."
Kerry promised to spend the first 100 days of his administration traveling the world to denounce his predecessor, apologize for his "radically wrong" policy, and seek "cooperation and compromise" with friend and foe alike. Borrowing language normally reserved to characterize "rogue" states, Kerry said he would "go to the United Nations and travel to our traditional allies to affirm that the United States has rejoined the community of nations."
[snip]
NOOOOO he wasn't misquoted. That is what he said. His spinners are trying to tell everyone what he MEANT to say.
but, he's so 9-10 that he just can't hide it anymore.
That's got to be the best graphic of this political season...way to go Grampa! Made my day!
This nut is going to get us all killed....
The graphic came from Bootyist Monk, and I was notified about it by Travis McGee.
It is one of those graphics where a picture may be worth thousands of words and articles.
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.
