Astounding example of Kerry Doublespeak

[windansea]

SAME SENATOR....SAME CONSTITUENT

"Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition ... to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."

--letter from Senator John Kerry to Wallace Carter of Newton Centre, Massachusetts, dated January 22 <1991>

"Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."

--Senator Kerry to Wallace Carter, January 31 <1991>

http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=1261

[krkaufman]

1. I am aghast

Those letters would appear to be contradictory, but that couldn't be.

SSDD

[windansea]

2. SOME SERIOUS CHUTZPAH

dang.....

[bearfartinthewoods]

45. wow...

can't be much clearer than that.

[krkaufman]

14. I apologize

p.s. I stand corrected; I apologize. The letters are not contradictory.

Sen. Kerry was against the war (1991) prior to Bush I going in; but, once we were engaged, he "strongly and unequivocally " supported the troops and the President's efforts. Effectively the same as General Clark's position on the current Iraq war (2003) -- but startlingly opposed to Senator Kerry's IWR vote on October 11, 2002.

"On January 11, I voted ... against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."

"From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis ..."

[windansea]

37. huh? n/t

[krkaufman]

39. Got a question?

Hard to tell what you're asking from a vague "huh?", but I'll assume that you're debating that the statements are not contradictory.

Paraphrasing...

War not yet started: "I am against going to war w/o more diplomacy."

(war starts)

War ongoing: "I support the President's efforts in this war."

The conditions and assumptions are entirely different between the statements, so they can't be called contradictory. Contradictory would be if he had said, once the war had started, "I've been a proponent for this war all along."

It's political word mincing, but that's politics.

However, I'm definitely of the opinion that his most recent IWR vote contradicts his 1991 vote *and* negates a core belief that he claims on his website:

From: http://www.johnkerry.com/about/

"By the time Senator Kerry returned home from Vietnam, he felt compelled to question decisions he believed were being made to protect those in positions of authority in Washington at the expense of the soldiers carrying on the fighting in Vietnam."

As it relates to this stated belief from Senator Kerry's website, it's pretty hard to justify his IWR "yes" vote -- primarily made to facilitate his November 2002 reelection. "protecting" his Senate seat.

[windansea]

49. ok thanks

now I understand what you were saying

:thumbsup:

[Hoppin_Mad]

3. Thanks ! Why am I NOT surprised NOR shocked ? (rhetorical question only) -

[David Dunham]

4. The Is The New Republic Trash; Disregard this Malarky

[windansea]

8. sorry but those are Kerry's letters

not TNR's

[Hoppin_Mad]

12. Is it untrue - or you can't accept JK being exposed ?

as the opportunistic hypocrite he is ?

Which one ?

[jpgray]

5. I wish people could get common sense by osmosis

-I support the president's actions.

-I prefer the sanctions be given time to work before we go to war.

They are not mutually exclusive, nor are they collectively exhaustive. So there isn't a contradiction. Take a logic class.

[windansea]

6. lets just see how many see it that way n/t

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[windansea]

11. I post from all kinds of sources

hardly ever from RW sources...and if I did it would be identified as required...

[David Dunham]

7. Kerry's Staff Explained in 1991 It was Due to Computer Error

(from National review)

Kerry aides at the time said that a computer error was responsible for the screw-up. The "unequivocal support" letter dated from the previous September, when the Iraqi invasion and American deployment had just happened but senators were not voting on war. Carter should have gotten yet a third letter saying that Kerry had thought war inadvisable but supported the troops. Kerry's press secretary explained that the senator's "position has been 100 percent consistent on this issue."

[windansea]

10. ahhh computer error

good one!!

[David Dunham]

13. At Least Kerry Didn't Fritter Away $41 Million

[windansea]

16. neither did I

or the guy I support

[dsc]

18. No just 500 lives

supporting the wrong Iraq war.

[David Dunham]

22. Dean and Trippi Threw Away $41 Million, Really Foolish!

[windansea]

24. not relevant

try to stay on topic please

[ibegurpard]

32. LOL! You DO realize you're not addressing a Dean supporter?

If I recally correctly, windandsea is a Clark supporter.

[windansea]

34. yes...he's confused

or in the wrong thread

[RetroLounge]

52. and this has what to do with Kerry voting for War?

we're still wondering...

[IndianaGreen]

26. They must be using the same computer that Evan Bayh uses n/t

:eyes:

[windansea]

36. don't get that one....explain??

:dunce:

[IndianaGreen]

44. I had the same experience with Evan Bayh

when I wrote a letter to his office petitioning him to vote against the nomination of John Ashcroft as AG. I described Ashcroft as an enemy of civil liberties and as a religious radical whose views ran counter to the mainstream (I mentioned Ashcroft having his head annointed with CRISCO).

I sent a similar message by e-mail to Bayh's office.

I received a reply to my letter first. I posted part of the letter on DU at the time, it was early 2001. Bayh criticized me for my religious intolerance! Bayh said that Ashcroft was a fine man and that to attack Ashcroft for his religious views was wrong.

Weeks later I got a reply to my e-mail, which was essentially the same text as the letter I had written. Bayh said that he was concerned about Ashcroft's views of law enforcement and civil Rights.

Bayh voted against confirming Ashcroft.

[sandnsea]

15. Aaaagh! No!! Two letters!!!

The campaign is doomed I tell ya', doomed!

This is old old old old. zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[windansea]

17. that's what Dean supporters used to tell me

I don't care how old they are...it's another example of how Kerry plays both sides of an issue

[sandnsea]

23. Got the complete letters?

Otherwise it's impossible to compare. It's entirely possible to word the letters to explain his views in the least offensive way. I know I explain my views differently depending on who I'm talking to.

Two letters. 30 years. Yep, this is dastardly.

Seriously, he's been through this. We've been through this on this board. And I've seen attack politics too many times in this primary to not know what I'm really seeing. Get it??

[windansea]

29. maybe you could contact Noam Scheiber

at TNR...

[sandnsea]

31. you posted them

If you don't have all the facts, it's not time to make the case.

[windansea]

35. oh please

If you think the letters are not credible or out of context have at it...this was not picked off some blog.

[sandnsea]

38. I don't have the letters

You posted it. It's up to you to have all the pertinent information to make your case. You can't because you have no idea what the point of either one of these letters even is. It's gossip column politics, plain and simple. Next thing I know you'll be posting "he's french looking."

[windansea]

40. that's like saying I need a tape recording

if I post a Kerry quote...I posted the excerpts from the letters exactly as they appeared in TNR...a reputable non RW source.

If the statements in the 2 Kerry letters are inacurate or misleading because they are out of context or something feel free to disprove or debunk them...it's not my problem.

PS I try and usually succeed in avoiding petty personal attacks...for example...botox threads, wife threads, etc etc

[sandnsea]

41. You need to know what you're saying

If you don't, don't post the crap. That's all.

[windansea]

42. debunk or disprove

or tell TNR they're fulla crap...if it was from some unknown blog I would find a credible source before posting

sorry but Kerry hasn't been annoited by ALL the media just yet

[sandnsea]

43. You posted nothing

You don't know what the letters mean. You're posting a couple of sentences. I don't have the letters. I couldn't possibly explain what they mean. You don't have the letters, you have no idea what they mean. You're posting nothing. I can't debunk nothing.

[bearfartinthewoods]

46. LAME DEFENSE

trying to demand. from poster, original letters referenced in an article is maybe the lamest thing i've seen yet.

[windansea]

19. so...so far we have

not really contradictory
TNR malarkey
computer error
old news
the usual shoot the messenger

anyone else have a theory?

[jpgray]

21. Well, by definition it isn't a contradiction

What else do you need?

I have to go to bed, but I'm sure you'll litter the board with a few dozen more of these by tomorrow. :hi:

[windansea]

ok sleep good

I have more littering to do

:)

[mb7588a]

20. AWESOME.

Out of context form letters from 13 years ago!

Constituents don't get letters in that short period of time, with that much difference. It JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN.

This guy's letters don't float unless we see the scanned letters and proof of raised letterhead etc.

[windansea]

27. contact Noam Scheiber

[e-mail]

[in_cog_ni_to]

25. If that wasn't so disgusting,

it would be funny. :grr: Geez....we don't say what people want to hear, do we? I do not trust that man.

Go Wes!

[IndianaGreen]

28. Go Wes!

If you want a real war hero, and one that will not be on every side of every issue, then Wes Clark is the real deal! Kerry is the phoney deal.

[bigtree]

30. Special thanks to TNR reporter Josh Benson for dredging this up

Man, we know better than to buy into republican lies and distortions. But some don't know enough to avoid spreading their bullshit around. Imagine the grin on that republican hack's face as he reads his subversion on DU. Mission accomplished.

[windansea]

33. republican lies??

TNR may not be your cup of tea..but they are hardly republican...they endorse Lieberman...maybe not your choice this year but I'll bet you voted for him and Gore in 2000

TNR also wrote some nice cases for the other Dem as listed below.

I'm sure Josh Benson would be amused to be called a republican hack.

Our Choice
by the Editors
For Joe Lieberman and a renewed Democratic Party.

The Wonk
by Michelle Cottle
The case for John Edwards.

Old Faithful
by Michael Crowley
The case for Dick Gephardt.

Credible Threat
by J. Peter Scoblic
The case for Wesley Clark.

Moral Center
by Jonathan Cohn
The case for Howard Dean.

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=express&s=endorsements0104

[blm]

47. According to Joe Klein it was an office aide mistake.

.

[RetroLounge]

53. Okay, we'll add that toi the list

Computer error
Office Aide Mistake

Joe Klein?????? Yeah, he's credible.

[HPLeft]

48. This is a bogus issue

Kerry indeed voted to give sanctions more time in 1990, and I agreed with him then - and I still agree with that vote now, even if in retrospect sanctions wouldn't have ousted Hussein from Kuwait. The Kerry doctrine states that America should go to war only when it has to, and not just because it wants to. Hussein would have been removed from Kuwait just as easily in the fall of 1991 as it would have been in January 1991.

The key element in the 2nd letter is the phrase, "from the outset of the invasion". Once American military forces are in harms way, a United States Senator must support the troops, at least until he or she sees convincing evidence that things have gone very wrong.

Real doublespeak is Howard Dean claiming that he was always against that war when he told Salon.com, on February 20, 2003 that: "if the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice."

What part of "unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable choice" is consistent with "I was always against that war" - as he has claimed in speeches and in television and print ads?

[bearfartinthewoods]

50. i'd like to know what the ... stands for

it usually means something was removed?

[quaker bill]

51. Don't you just hate it

when your aides send the wrong form letter to people?

It is so embarrasing.

We had one here recently where an aide failed to fill in the blanks.

Dear _____

Representative XXX received your letter in support of / opposition to _____. The representative understands your concerns about _____. .....

It made the local paper. Most embarrasing.

[tinanator]

54. You certainly dont need to reach back that far

The last thing I heard him say was a meaningless series of circular nothings trying to touch a canned message of some sort. How can anyone place faith in someone who doesnt talk straight?