You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did Kerry really F up badly? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
buycitgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-01-04 11:01 AM
Original message
Did Kerry really F up badly?
Advertisements [?]
Edited on Sun Aug-01-04 11:04 AM by buycitgo
anybody see his refusal to answer the charge that he flipflopped on the 87 billion dollar vote, when challenged on it by Stephie?

they RIDICULED the hell out of him on the show after he said it, saying it was 'Dukakissian' and that it would not stand; that he'd HAVE to answer it?

WHY ON EARTH did he DO that?

why didn't he say what really happpened, that Bush threatened to VETO his own bill?

I cannnot believe I heard him say what he did?

anybody else see that? haven't seen it discussed here

sorry if I missed it

this is a BAD portent for the future

here's what I mean, from Kentuck's thread:

It is not an easy explanation for John Kerry. But to put it in perspective, initially we were told the war was not going to cost anything. The oil revenues would pay for it. They were wrong. Whether they lied, misled, or whatever, they were wrong. Then Bush asks for $87 billion with $20 billion for the troops. At this point in time, they have spent about $450 million dollars of that. That is less than 10% of what they said they needed. Why did they lie about how much they needed?

But when it was presented to Bush that the $20 billion should be taken off the huge taxcut for his wealthy friends, Bush said he would veto the entire bill if that came to his desk. He was the person willing to keep the funds from the troops, not Kerry. Kerry would not have kept the funds from the troops if his vote was decisive. His vote was a simple vote on principle. His principles were stronger than Bush's but it cannot be explained in one simple sentence to counter the charges by the Bush regime.




I'm just stunned he didn't turn this around on Bush

what are they THINKING on his staff?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC