Kerry: Gaining Edge on Terror

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Kerry: Gaining Edge on Terror
72
Sun, 07-25-2004 - 6:35pm

"Senator John Kerry said on Friday he would seek to persuade voters over the next three months that he would do a "better job than George Bush" in protecting the nation from terrorism..." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/politics/campaign/25KERR.html?ei=5065&en=789ba5a17982cc66&ex=1091332800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&position=


"In response to a question, Mr. Kerry said he has given no thought to the possibility of a terrorist attack taking place in the midst of the presidential campaign. "I don't think about it; I can't control it," he said." http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2004/07/i_cant_conrol_i.html


He certainly can inspire confidence.




Edited 7/25/2004 7:04 pm ET ET by cl-wrhen

Renee ~~~

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 4:45pm
How does he have no power?

He is a United States Senator (who chooses not to attend but 11% of the votes held during the past 12 months).

He has power, but it seems he chooses not to put it to use in the way the people of Massachusetts elected him to do so.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 6:05pm
So you're saying that Saddam was justified in ignoring resolutions by a 'corrupt UN'. Also, since were slamming the UN (now that it's convenient to do so..), how about the fact that in the UN some countries have vetos and how come the UN is not a democratic organization? After all, we're pushing democracy everywhere, arent we? I guess 'not everyone is equal' after all. Kind of like when democracy was to everyone but women. Yeah, we were too 'stupid' to vote (that was one of the argument), and too 'emotional'. And don't even get me started about blacks in america.. The US has a very poor record to be telling others what to do. 1964 was not a long time ago!

Oh, and Saudi Arabia is just a wonderful country, democratic, free...it fully deserves our total support!


Edited 7/27/2004 6:11 pm ET ET by nicecanadianlady

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 6:06pm
Senators have 'collective power' with their vote. Very different from the executive power the president has. By your definition, I have power too, since I vote too!
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 7:37pm

No one is asking Kerry to send the Massachusettes militia to root out Al Queda sleeper cells at the DNC.


Presidential candidates are expected to demonstrate their leadership ability so that people will be confident they are voting for someone who can actually lead.


'I don't know. I don't think about it," is not an acceptable answer if a presidential candidate is asked if original recipe or extra crispy is better let alone

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 8:38pm
Wasn't the question about terrorism DURING THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN? If so, I can't think what else he could do personally! That WAS the context of the question, wasn't it? He wasn't asked "what would you do about terrorism once you're elected" at that time.

But he was, on other occasions, asked that larger question, and he THEN DID ANSWER it.

What kind of answer did you expect? I'm baffled.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 9:29pm
<'I don't know. I don't think about it," is not an acceptable answer if a presidential candidate is asked if original recipe or extra crispy is better let alone if they are asked a question abou the most important issue this country has faced sine WWII.>


But the answer, "I'm sure something will pop into my head here," to the question "Have you made mistakes?" is so inspiring?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 10:01pm
You say that now, but look what happened under Jimmy Carter, our last truly liberal President. Interst rates in double figures...unemployment soaring.

If Kerry wins, I would expect to see some of the same during his 4 years in office.

To me, the only reason I would vote for Bush is that he is currently the lesser of two evils, as I am too educated to fall for Kerry's jobs proposal as he does not give all the details (then again what politician does).

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 10:04pm
The last time I checked Saddam Hussein UNCONDITIONALLY SURRENDERED to the coallition forces in the Gulf War, and signed the cease fire agreements in which he agreed to abide by the UN resolutions, which we all know he never did, and probably never intended to do.

If Hussein did not unconditionally surrender, we would not have had to worry about Iraq now, as he would have been either removed or killed back in the early 90's. Gen. Schwarzkopf wanted to go into Baghdad and take him out back then, and with hindsight, it looks like he was 100% right (just as Patton was right about taking Stalin out, and MacArthur was right about the Chinese)

What does Saudi Arabia have to do with the war in Iraq?????

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 10:07pm
The difference between your voting power and Senator Kerry's is that you vote on the person to represent you in Congress and the Senate. The Senators and the Congressmen have the power to vote on legislation, but in order to do so, they actually have to be present, which Kerry has only been 10% of the time.

I think that a rule should be put into effect that if you are a Congressman or a Senator and wish to run for the Presidency, you have to give up your seat as Bob Dole did. It is truly the only way that you are not only doing a service to the voters who put you into the seat by allowing someone who will actually be able to fulfill the job, but then you (the candidate) will also be able to concentrate solely on the campaign. Just a thought.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 10:18pm

<>


So you should have no problem posting it here.

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

Pages