Posted: 3/15/2004 8:37:27 AM EDT
|
This is a succinct summary of everything I hate about this crapweasel. Kerry's stances on Cuba open to attack BY PETER WALLSTEN [email protected] John Kerry had just pumped up a huge crowd in downtown West Palm Beach, promising to make the state a battleground for his quest to oust President Bush, when a local television journalist posed the question that any candidate with Florida ambitions should expect: What will you do about Cuba? As the presumptive Democratic nominee, Kerry was ready with the bravado appropriate for a challenger who knows that every answer carries magnified importance in the state that put President Bush into office by just 537 votes. ''I'm pretty tough on Castro, because I think he's running one of the last vestiges of a Stalinist secret police government in the world,'' Kerry told WPLG-ABC 10 reporter Michael Putney in an interview to be aired at 11:30 this morning. Then, reaching back eight years to one of the more significant efforts to toughen sanctions on the communist island, Kerry volunteered: ``And I voted for the Helms-Burton legislation to be tough on companies that deal with him.'' It seemed the correct answer in a year in which Democratic strategists think they can make a play for at least a portion of the important Cuban-American vote -- as they did in 1996 when more than three in 10 backed President Clinton's reelection after he signed the sanctions measure written by Sen. Jesse Helms and Rep. Dan Burton. There is only one problem: Kerry voted against it. OF COURSE HE DID! THE HELMS-BURTON ACT IS ANETHEMA TO LIBERAL IDEOLOGIES! YET HE'S WILLING TO LIE AND SAY WHATEVER HE THINKS HIS AUDIENCE WANTS TO HEAR RATHER THAN ASSUME A POSITION BASED ON CONVICTIONS AND PRINCIPLES THAT ACTUALLY MEAN SOMETHING TO HIM Asked Friday to explain the discrepancy, Kerry aides said the senator cast one of the 22 nays that day in 1996 because he disagreed with some of the final technical aspects. But, said spokesman David Wade, Kerry supported the legislation in its purer form -- and voted for it months earlier. The confusion illustrates a persistent problem for Kerry as Republicans exploit his 19-year voting history to paint the Massachusetts senator as a waffler on major foreign-affairs questions such as the Iraq war, Israel's security barrier and intelligence funding. Cuba policy is particularly treacherous for Kerry because Florida's nearly half-million Cuban-American voters could be pivotal in awarding the state's 27 electoral votes. And Republicans are preparing to unleash a wave of publicity designed to portray Kerry's new toughness as an election-year conversion from a career of liberal positions on Cuba. Speaking to reporters Saturday after a meeting of senior Florida Republicans about increasing Hispanic turnout this year, Lt. Gov. Toni Jennings predicted that Kerry's voting record on Cuba would ''haunt'' him in the coming months. www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/state/8181098.htm |
|
Speaking of the Asshat, I got this in an email this morning. I dont know if its true and didnt look any of it up so if you choose to, just read it for the entertainment value. ---------------------------------------- THIS GUY FLIP FLOP IS REALLY SCARY. john, FLIP FLOP, kerry IS STRONG ON DEFENSE??????????????? IN A PIG'S ASS HE IS. He voted to kill the Bradley Fighting Vehicle He voted to kill the M-1 Abrams Tank He voted to kill every Aircraft carrier laid down from 1988 He voted to kill the Aegis anti aircraft system He voted to Kill the F-15 strike eagle He voted to Kill the Block 60 F-16 He voted to Kill the P-3 Orion upgrade He voted to Kill the B-1 He voted to Kill the Patriot anti Missile system He voted to Kill the FA-18 He voted to Kill the B-2 He voted to Kill the F117 In short, he voted to kill every military appropriation for the development and deployment of every weapons systems since 1988 to include the Battle armor for our troops. With Kerry as president our Army will be made up of naked men running around with sticks and clubs. He also voted to kill all anti terrorism activities of every agency of the U.S. Government and to cut the funding of the FBI by 60%, to cut the funding for the CIA by 80%, and cut the funding for the NSA by 80%. But then he voted to increase OUR funding for U.N operations by 800%!!! IS THIS A PRESIDENT YOU WANT? I THINK NOT--- |
|
Personally (mostly just because I'm a big fan of abstract philosophy and moral considerations), there are some morality issues with John Kerry that really concern me. Of course, his stance on nearly every issue is offensive (and yet, at the same time, agreeable... that's the nice thing about taking EVERY side of EVERY issue.... what a horse's ass), but I like this bit better. When he was in college, he calmly protested the Viet Nam war, claiming it was morally wrong. He didn't go all-out (the way he did AFTER his "participation" in the war), because that was politically unprofitable (you were seen as a radical if you did that.) THEN he realized that it was politically profitable to be a military veteran. He would have a better shot at a political office if he could say "I was in a war and fought for our country!" This bit has apparently paid off, as he lists on all his various websites (his campaign, senate, etc. sites)with pride his fighting in Viet Nam. Also, while in Viet Nam, he took life. I don't mean he was in a firefight and MIGHT have killed some one, I mean he got a silver star for killing a wounded man. What this means is that John Kerry VOLUNTEERED for the military, VOLUNTEERED to go to Viet Nam and chose to kill (rather than capture, as would be, under the legal dictates and philosophies of the conduct of war, more appropriate)a man for a cuase he openly believed was morally wrong. Finally, when he got home, being a radical protester was finally acceptable, so he got to do all-out condemning his country and his fellow fighting men, including the crew of his own PT boat who had to stay in Viet Nam, while he went home 8 months early. John Kerry, aside from being a pathetic candidate who likes to take both sides of every issue and is basically only running a platform of "I don't like Bush," is also, quite plainly, a bad person. He is a walking moral travesty. And millions upon millions of idiot Liberals want that man to be president. Why could anyone every doubt the effectiveness of a democratic republic in which everyone eventually gets to vote? |