Posted on 09/09/2006 6:26:20 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent
BOSTON —Sen. John Kerry is calling on Democrats to rally around his plan to pull U.S. combat troops out of Iraq by next July and redeploy some to Afghanistan.
The Massachusetts Democrat gave a speech this morning at Boston’s Faneuil Hall.
On the eve of Congressional mid-term elections, Kerry says Democrats must propose a new direction to defeat terrorism.
He said Bush “pretends again and again” that Iraq is the central front on the war on terror, but Kerry said it isn’t and “never has been.”
Kerry says the military commitment in Iraq weakens the United States’ ability to respond to threats in Iran and Afghanistan.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bostonherald.com ...
Jeez, he's pulling a Red Sox style September move, pulling defeat out of the jaws of victory. You go, John! Get the House to put up the Murtha bill again. What a Maroon.
I grow so tired of listening to this moronic arrogant a-hole.
The son of John K Galbraith has a book he calls The End of Iraq. I suspect that it is the source of the Dem ideas on Iraq like redeploying over the horizon, and this Iraq is keeping us from Iran and Iraq. He is a very angry state department type who think diplomats know best and should have been in charge in Iraq. It may also be his idea that a state guy like Armitage should take over from Rumsfelds. He brags that in 12 years in Yugoslavia there have been no American casualties. (Aren't they still deciding on the borders, there)
not only Kerry served in VN, in his mind Kerry also ventured to Cambodia in Christmas of 68...hehehe.
LT Ping!
I Play poker....
Folding your cards out of turn has a new moniker I heard this weekend...
It's called a "John Kerry" and means when you pre-emptively surrender your hand....
Stop it, george!! :-)
Yeah, isn't there something in War 101 called a . . . flanking action . . .?
Gawd, I'd hate to know the Rat definition of a "flanking action."
Ah, c'mon: it's better'n listening to the Hildebeast moronic arrogant a-hole.
This isn't hard to understand.
Well, now haven't the Rats just given us all kinds of new, neat expressions for the popular lexicon.
First there was the Lewinsky, now the John Kerry.
And don't forget the Clymer!
I hear ya.
http://www.boston.com/partners/worldnow/necn.html?
see the news clip - a couple of digs against him
type in 'kerry' in the search box....
oh, and check out Kerry Healey, the present Lt. Gov. now running for Gov., that he is also insulting...
""It's all on the line in this race," Kerry said. "All on the line."
"I don't want a governor for the state of Massachusetts supporting a president whose as wrong as this president is on interrupting the war on terror and keeping our troops in Iraq," he said."
He apparently had reserved seats but also sent out 2000 flyers around streetcorners in Boston for the common people to attend....that room is tiny, I don't know the # of seats, but it is tiny....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Path To 9-11: Clinton Admits to Some Distraction in His Own Book!
...
Item -- Philosophical sympathizer Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in her June 2004 column evaluating the Clinton presidency:
And then there is the matter of Osama bin Laden and his network of jihadists, al-Qaida. In his autobiography, "My Life," Clinton writes of a difficult period in 1998 when he was trying to salvage his marriage while also confronting al-Qaida attacks on U.S. embassies. On vacation with Hillary, he said, "I spent the first couple of days alternating between begging forgiveness and planning the strikes on al-Qaida."
That about says it all, doesn't it? Even Clinton, with his legendary ability to "compartmentalize," couldn't possibly have concentrated fully on the threat. He was not only distracted, but he was also boxed in by the scandal. Any attempt to deal more harshly with bin Laden would have been derided by political foes accusing him of trying to divert the public's attention.
In "My Life," Clinton owns up to his sins, admitting that "what I had done with Monica Lewinsky was immoral and foolish." But he also spends a vast treasury of words to prove that a cabal of ultraconservatives was determined to wreck his presidency. He's right. They were.
But they weren't elected president. He was.
The fact that he WAS distracted would appear to be an historical fact, and in the autobiographer's own words. The only question appears to be the degree of the distraction.
So what exactly is ABC getting wrong in "The Path to 9/11"?"
http://newsbusters.org/node/7511
   Can I get me some more medals here?     |
Didn't they have a vote on that earlier this summer? Got what, 12 votes max?
Poodle season?
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.