Kerry Rolls

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Kerry Rolls
108
Sun, 07-18-2004 - 3:36pm



Kerry couldn't say no


Hillary waffle was just part of a wimpy week


http://nydailynews.com/front/story/213256p-183572c.html








John Kerry is about to be crowned King of all Democrats and he's got at least a 50-50 shot at being the 44th President of the United States. Hillary Clinton is but one of 100 senators. Any clash between the two should thus be a mismatch - and it was. Kerry never stood a chance.

If you're scoring at home, that's Clinton 1, Kerry 0.

What's amazing about the spat over whether Hillary would get a primetime convention speech was how quickly Kerry retreated. No sooner had his aides insulted Clinton by saying, first, she hadn't asked for a role and second, the convention was about the "future" then they caved and asked her to speak. Begged would be more accurate.

Kerry's the king all right, but Clinton's the unchallenged Queen of Democrats - and the King better not forget it again.

Her supporters rejoiced at her triumph, but Republicans must be delighted, too, for the embarrassing incident reveals a weak spot in the Democratic nominee.

John Kerry is a man who can be rolled. Quickly and often.

His surrender to Clinton was one of three cases in just a week where Kerry took a stand, then immediately folded his cards when challenged. He's definitely not ready for the World Series of Poker.

The first case involved the July 8 Bush-bash at Radio City Music Hall. A day after he praised Whoopi Goldberg and others as representing the "heart and soul of America," Kerry wilted in the face of media and GOP heat. Suddenly, he found Goldberg's lewd act inappropriate.

And on the same day as the Hillary fold, Kerry backed away from some of his own TV ads when black officials called them "lackluster."

Only a week after touting the $2 million buy as the largest ever aimed at black voters, Kerry agreed to scrap the ads. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said Kerry flubbed by not showing the ads to the caucus first. "It was corrected," Cummings said as Kerry agreed to the changes the caucus wanted.

Final score: Critics 3, Kerry 0.

None of these incidents is fatal at this early stage, and Dem partisans will even argue they show a nuanced thinker willing to listen and change his mind. Those traits, they say, go to the heart of why they prefer him to President Bush.

But it's also true that the three incidents play into the GOP attack machine theme that Kerry is a flip-flopper who can't be trusted. Even a top Dem stalwart conceded there are doubts about Kerry's "internal gyroscope."

Such doubts worry this Kerry supporter because of how he views the election landscape: A slim majority of Americans have turned against Bush, but Kerry has not yet captured all their votes, especially independents. To win, my Democratic sage says, Kerry must meet two tests:

"He must convince people that he has a strong foreign policy, and he must show middle class families that he cares about them and understands their problems."

He's right, but here's a third challenge. Kerry needs a Sister Souljah moment.

It was 12 years ago, just before his own crowning convention, that Bill Clinton demonstrated strength and independence by scolding the young black rap singer. She had defended Los Angeles riots by saying, "If black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people."

Clinton not only said the comments reflected "hatred," he did so at Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition. Sister Souljah then called Clinton "racist," and Jackson was furious at him, too. But Clinton stood his ground, and the incident established his willingness to say no and risk offending a key party voting bloc.

Kerry has not yet taken such a risk. When he does, he'll be a stronger, more worthy candidate for the Oval Office.

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Fri, 07-23-2004 - 2:57pm
Actually it was one of the reasons.

The paramount reason was due to the failure of Iraq to fully comply with 17 UN resolutions which they violated several times over.

Any and all chemical and biological weapons were supposed to be destroyed in the presence of a UN inspector. Hussein did not allow that, and could not produce documentation for the chemical and biological materials that were supposedly destroyed.

Hussein threw out inspectors on numerous occasions, only to allow them back in under threat of attack, and then when they were allowed in, he and his people would not cooperate with the inspectors, which even Hans Blix stated.

We still dont know what happened to the chemical and biological agents or the weapons that Iraq had in the mid 90's.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Fri, 07-23-2004 - 2:58pm
I think that if any of those aforementioned countries were foolish enough to strike against us, I think the retaliation from the US would be catastrophic at this point.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Fri, 07-23-2004 - 3:01pm
You still have not provided anything to refute my points, as you cannot, which I understand....even most political analysts are saying the same thing as I am (gee I wonder why?)
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Fri, 07-23-2004 - 3:01pm
I can tell you are confused.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-12-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Sat, 07-24-2004 - 2:42am
Hey, IMO death does not make one sacred, any more than being born does.

I respect you for your opinions, and your feelings, and if you dont like it, I will not go on about him to you.

But as far as the Regan goes I have not respect for him, and I will not argue my reasons since it hurts your feelings, that would be wrong, but as for talking to others about him, well,

I will speak of him any way I want. This IS America, is it not?
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-12-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Sat, 07-24-2004 - 2:46am
I am mostly referring to our media, and that is where most Americans get their knowledge, tv media.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-12-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Sat, 07-24-2004 - 2:50am
good comeback.

why not just give the source or was there none?

I am confused when you say something as if it were factual, and there is nothing to back it up.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Sat, 07-24-2004 - 9:09am
Listen if you dont like then you dont like him, you are right this is America. But you cant be saying things that you have been without proof of those accusations. I can call you an angry cross-dresser that wears hot pink lipstick who thinks that your cat is the next president. That is my opinion (a made up one mind you) but i have no facts to that statement. So that makes me careless in repeating that statement until I have the facts. That is the only problem I have. Dont like him, but if you are going to speak against him, then speak against him with facts.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-12-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Sun, 07-25-2004 - 2:58am
Ok, how am I gonna be a cross dresser AND wear the hot pink lipstick? LOL.

well, I thought Regans mental depreciation was common knowledge but there were many reports of his mental failing that came out after it was made public that he had alzheimers disease. Do I think ALzheimers disease is funny? no, not one bit. I used to work with alzheimers patients and go home all the time bawling all the time because I could not understand how someone would go through their whole life and end it with such confusion and bewliderment.

that said. I mostly think the REgan lovers have denied this due to what? I don't know. Their president was human, and not above anything like that.

There is tons of info on the internet on this topic. since my search engine slows when I am recording cd's. and I am now, I will notpost links. I think perople hardly ever read them anyway. I am on call this weekend, and need to go to bed relatively soon, but if you are still wanting me to post a link on monday, I will.

Personally, I think anyone wanting to run the show for the U.S.A. is mentally ill. I really do. But, Reagan. I felt sorry for him.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
In reply to: cl_wrhen
Sun, 07-25-2004 - 10:15am
Yep.. This will lead to an escalation to armement, because now everyone feels they need to protect themselves from the US! To be honest with you, there have even been a few times (like when the American ambassador essentialy threatened us) that I have felt that Canada should make sure it has enough protection and allies to protect itself from the US. Isn't that sad that the US's best friend and neighbour needs to be protected? I also heard a number of americans say that they should 'annex' Canada, so that it can't go against it, and because then it would be even more powerful. I sincerely hope that people who think like that are a tiny minority!

Pages