CBS News: John Kerry's Contradictions

[IndianaGreen]

The following article by conservative columnist Fred Barnes clearly illustrates the most problematic aspects of a Kerry candidacy were he to become the Democratic nominee. Kerry will be savaged by the Left and the Right for his many flip-flops on the issues.

I think that Barnes's characterization of Kerry as "the Great Explainer" is right on target!



His emergence as the Great Explainer
is a problem for Kerry. Politicians
prefer to be on offense, not defense.

John Kerry's Contradictions
NASHUA, N.H., Jan. 26, 2004

John Kerry has some explaining to do. His record in 19 years as a U.S. senator has prompted liberal Democrats -- Howard Dean, for one -- to suggest he's too conservative and Republicans like party chairman Ed Gillespie to call him too liberal. For Kerry those charges are easily dismissed. What does cause trouble for Kerry is his need to explain and then explain some more the many contradictory votes and statements he's made over the years.

<snip>

His emergence as the Great Explainer is a problem for Kerry. Politicians prefer to be on offense, not defense. And while the need to explain isn't a major problem for Kerry now while Democratic presidential candidates are being nice to each other, it could get far worse. As the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, Kerry is sure to be closely scrutinized by the media, as Dean was when he was the frontrunner. And if Kerry wins the nomination, the Bush campaign will try to put him on the defensive by playing up inconsistencies in his record.

On "Fox News Sunday," Kerry also was forced to explain his conflicting positions on gay marriage and the CIA. He voted against enactment of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which says a state is not obligated to recognize a gay marriage legalized by another state. But Kerry said he's actually opposed to gay marriage.

So why not vote for DOMA, which passed overwhelmingly? Kerry said he thought the Senate was gay bashing and "being used to drive wedge issues." In fact, gay marriage "was no issue" at the time, he said. "That was politics."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/26/opinion/main595936.shtml

[Duder]

1. Sam Smith said it this way:

'IF things keep going the way they are, the Democrats will nominate for president a man who was wrong on the Iraq war, wrong on the Bush tax cuts, wrong on the Bush education disaster, and wrong on the Patriot Act. And despite intimations of immutability by the media, all this has happened many, if not most, Democrats being unaware of the aforementioned.

In short, the Democrats are preparing to nominate someone who agreed with George Bush on many of the major issues of the day and has only lately discovered that this may not have been such a good idea and so is making gentle adjustments in both his opinions and autobiography. Not that the latter couldn't use some help, since the most interesting elements of it, according to the candidate's own repeated testimony, occurred more than three decades ago.'
...

[Valjean]

13. Kerry-Lieberman

Kerry-Lieberman

The OTHER Bush ticket.

[huckleberry]

2. Funding for CIA

John Batchelor and some other talking head were discussing Kerry's vote on this tonight on the radio. They said that the republicans were going to hammer Kerry on this one. I think Kerry is going to be spending a lot of time trying to defend all his contradictory votes.

from the article above

"On the CIA, Kerry sponsored a bill to cut $1.5 billion from the budget for intelligence gathering. Then after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on September 11, 2001, he asked why America's intelligence wasn't better. His explanation: He wanted the CIA to devote more money to human intelligence and less to technical means. He sought, he explained, "to change the culture of our intelligence gathering." He didn't explain, however, how slashing the CIA budget would achieve that."

[tritsofme]

16. Oh gosh I can see the comercials now...

Whoever the nominee is, its going to get ugly and bloody.

I dread the campaign tv blitz that for the most part has passed us by (IL) so far.

[Frances]

3. So--the Repubs are going to make gay marriage

the central issue of the election if Kerry is the candidate. Big surprise. They would have done the same thing with Dean. Or any Democrat.

The Repubs hope to win the election by appealing to the fears of Americans about terrorists and gays.

We can play into their hands by picking apart our Dem candidates.

Or we can keep our heads and vote for ABB.

[Lobo_13]

5. And people wonder why I don't like Kerry

maybe shameless theft of other candidates material?

Think that could be part of it?

[IndianaGreen]

9. Kerry's worst enemy is Kerry

We can play into their hands by picking apart our Dem candidates.

Kerry is unelectable and his nomination will bring down Democrats running for State and local office in many states, including Indiana where we have a tough race between Democratic Governor Joe Kernan and Bush's former budget director, Mitch Daniels. Kernan is currently leading, but having a gun grabbing flip-flopping Eastern elitist at the top of the ticket will hurt Kernan.

[Valjean]

14. Southern Primaries

Kerry will sink like a stone in the South. He is EVERYTHING that they hate. Uppity Fancy Yankees.

What they DON'T realize is that Bush is an uppity fancy Yankee with a Texas Drawl. The next campaign should be about this. It should be a counter-offensive in the class war that has been waged for the LAST THIRTY YEARS!!! Kerry CANNOT represent the middle and lower class when he came from old money and married old money TWICE!!!!

[DemBones DemBones]

21. Dean comes from old money, too, and comes across as much

more of an abrasive Yankee than Kerry does. Kerry's military record will be a big asset in the South, too. Dean's lack of military service will be noted, too.

Kerry, Dean, Lieberman, and Bush all graduated from Yale between 1966-1970, as best I can judge. Bush and Dean are the two who come across as rich frat boys, arrogant and thin-skinned.

If we want someone to represent more average Americans, it's Kucinich, Edwards and Clark we should be looking at. Most Americans can relate to any of them better than to the ones who grew up in privilege.

Sharpton is the only black in the race now but I know nothing about how he grew up except that he lived in SC at some time and he started preaching when he was only four years old. I've never heard him say he grew up poor so I suppose he didn't, but am sure he never played tennis with Dean at the Maidstone Club, either.

There's more to choosing a candidate than looking at how much money his parents had, or didn't have, though.

[regnaD kciN]

40. Is this intentional irony?

I would point out that exactly the same words, a month or so ago, could have been released by the Kerry campaign against Dean...

[Lobo_13]

4. Good luck with that, Mr. Kerry

Welcome to the Dem nomination, if you can take it.

Me, I'll be watching gleefully from the sidelines while the media and BushCo tears you apart.

So much for electability.

[bigtree]

23. Me, I'll be watching gleefully from the sidelines

Aren't you proud?

[frustrated_lefty]

6. If he gets the nomination

he is going to be attacked from both the left and the right. It doesn't matter if the criticisms are self-contradictory, there is something to resonate with everyone. He's more liberal than Ted Kennedy, but he voted in favor of a ban on partial birth abortion.

I don't have the animosity towards Kerry I do for Bush....but this man can be spun in any way a person wants, and, to some extent, that's because he never bothered to take a stand on any issue in all his years of politicking.

He may get the nomination...and I'll vote for him. And I'll go straight home, take a shower, and try to forget it ever happened.

[David Dunham]

8. There'll Be No Effective Green Party This Election

With Nader out of the picture as the Green party candidate, there will be no effective Green party this year. Kerry's critics will only be Bush fascist henchpersons.

[IndianaGreen]

15. Kerry will get attacked by the Left and the Right

The war remains an issue even if the Democrats choose to bury their heads in the sand.

[Valjean]

17. Run Buchanan Run !!!!

I think he's about pissed off enough to do it again.

[frustrated_lefty]

24. The attacks from the left

do not necessarily come from the Green party.

Kerry voted in FAVOR of a ban on partial birth abortions. That touches all demographics, it's not just Naderites.

Responsible people on the left are going to be expressing concern about Kerry. Maybe we should "just get over it," like his vote on IWR?

[regnaD kciN]

43. That pretty much sums up my reaction...

...should Kerry be the nominee.

He may get the nomination...and I'll vote for him. And I'll go straight home, take a shower, and try to forget it ever happened.

The only difference is that I'll then drop by the registrar at the polling place, and change my party affiliation from "Democratic" to "independent"...if I haven't already done that if/when Kerry locks up the nomination.

:-(

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

7. Yes and I trust Fred Barnes to accurately paraphrase and frame

a conversation with Kerry (without too much bias and character assassination) as I do for him to do the same with Dean, Kucinich or any of the others.

I wish to thank him, however, on behalf of all the people who want to fire the man who butters his bread, for revealing their strategy...it will probably come in handy no matter who the nominee is.

IT will come in very handy to challenge the conscience of a guy who fulfilled his obligation in Viet Nam when voting for war..to a guy who went AWOL.

[IndianaGreen]

11. The strategy is simple: Show Kerry contradicting himself on TV

The strategy is simple: Show Kerry contradicting himself on TV over and over again on the same issues. The one about DOMA is a good example!

As many times as Kerry has finessed and nuanced his position on a variety of issues, that's how many times you will see Kerry on TV.

The public will see Kerry as an opportunist that tailors his message to his audience or as an untrustworthy double-talking politician. Either way, Kerry's goose is cooked!

Kerry is unelectable!

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

18. I say counter that strategy by showing Republicans waging war

over wedge issues rather than confronting the real issues people are concerned with - Healthcare, jobs, economy and security...all of which are really fucked up right now.

I really don't think Kerry needs to defend himself..it is WAY easier to show clips of Bush fumbling and lying.

[IndianaGreen]

20. Remember that you have to make the case that Bush should be replaced

right in the middle of a war.

You can't do that with a candidate that is as vulnerable as John Kerry.

Kerry is no Wes Clark, and that is why Kerry will lose in November!

[DemBones DemBones]

28. So you're supporting Wes Clark? Who, like Howard Dean, never

had to vote on IWR?

[IndianaGreen]

29. Kucinich did not vote for IWR

What's Kerry's excuse today?

[krkaufman]

36. Wes Clark's vote on IWR

No, Clark didn't *VOTE* on IWR, but he *did* give testimony stating, in oppostion to Richard Perle, that the resolution should merely threaten force -- but that it should *NOT* authorize the use of force.

Clark also testified that Iraq was not an imminent threat, and that the war on terrorism, Al Qaeda and bin Laden should be the priorities.

[Myra]

38. Correct. Clark is on record as clearly opposing it. On record in many

places in fact.

[regnaD kciN]

47. Which is one of the reasons why...

...should Dean fail to recover, my allegiance will go to Clark rather than to one of the Senatorial IWR-supporters.

[krkaufman]

37. Exactly... this will be the ROG's primary argument

> Remember that you have to make the case that Bush
> should be replaced right in the middle of a war.

No question. This is my main concern.

The ROG will stress that they have a working team in place, fighting the fight; now, in the middle of a war, is not the time to bring in a guy who hasn't been in the military for 30-years. Technology has changed, warfare has changed, blah blah blah.. I expect we'll be hearing a lot about "on the job training."

Sen. Kerry will need to counter this. (Maybe by stressing that the war on terrorism is not about conventional warfare, Pres. Bush's diversion in Iraq notwithstanding.)

ABB

[mikehiggins]

10. OH, like nobody on DU was saying this all along?

What a surprise.

A Yankee liberal from Taxachusetts. Just what the Democratic party needs to run against Bush.

What a lame excuse for a campaign that'll be.

The assholes were even talking about Willie Horton because Kerry was Lt.Governor (no slight intended, btw) under Dukakis.

Ah, for the advantages of having a well documented legislative history way inside the Beltway.

Just what we needed.

MOre of the same that got us to this point in the first place.

Hosannah!

[bigtree]

25. Yet some would have us believe . . .

. . . that their candidate is being savaged, misrepresented, slandered by critisism and innuendo; here and elsewhere.

mikehiggins, are you satisfied that Gen. Clark has been represented fairly here and in the media. If not, do you want anyone else here to believe you?

[HawkerHurricane]

12. Dear Senator Kerry

Welcome to front runner status.

You will now get to be smeared by every reich winger on the planet, and every Democrat who believes you are not the best candidate.

I don't envy you.

But not to worry; if you fall out of front runner status they will ignore you again; if you do not it means you are winning and you can laugh all the way to the White House.

[David Dunham]

19. Kerry Supported By Washington Post Columnist (1/29)

If Karl Rove thinks he can take down John Kerry the way his mentor, Lee Atwater, took down Michael Dukakis, he's got another thing coming.

The Kerry who delivered that victory speech in Manchester on Tuesday night was the most effective Democratic politico since the fall of Bill Clinton. Within his first two minutes at the microphone, Kerry had delivered a stinging populist attack on the president and managed to identify himself with his Vietnam vet comrades who surrounded him onstage.

"I depended on the same band of brothers I depended on some 30 years ago," said Kerry, thanking Max Cleland and a bunch of guys wearing the insignias of their old units for delivering in New Hampshire as they had in Iowa. "We're a little older, a little grayer, but we still know how to fight for our country!"

Almost instantaneously, Kerry deployed both his offense and defense.

On the stump, he is seldom so succinct: Digressions abound, adverbs pop up to take the punch from his punch lines. But Kerry has a sense of occasion; he is at his best -- as he was Tuesday night, and during his debates against Bill Weld in their 1996 Senate contest -- when the whole world is watching.

What should most concern Republicans, though, is Kerry's adeptness in attacking the administration's nearly 90-degree tilt toward the rich -- toward the insurance, drug and oil companies, against which Kerry, like all the Democratic candidates except Joe Lieberman, inveighs. The response of the GOP bloggers, talk show hosts and columnists is to accuse Kerry of a culturally inauthentic populism. Teresa Heinz Kerry and her husband, they note, bear scant resemblance to Ma and Pa Kettle.

Historically, though, the Democrats have done pretty well under the leadership of patricians who've attacked Republican plutocrats. Those patricians have needed some way to establish their normality, to be sure. In that sense, Kerry's time in Vietnam humanizes him much as the battle with polio did Franklin Roosevelt.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[IndianaGreen]

26. Kerry will be savaged by the Left and the Right

Kerry will be savaged by the Left and the Right for his many flip-flops on the issues.

It is not just Kerry's multi-dimensional explanations for his IWR vote, a vote that Ted Kennedy characterized yesterday as a "war vote," it is also Kerry's behaviour when the war began. Where was Kerry when Bush forced the UN to pull the inspectors? Where was Kerry when Bush went on TV to announce that the "disarming of Iraq has begun"? Did Kerry go on TV and denounce Bush's betrayal? Did Kerry condemn the invasion of Iraq when it began? Did Kerry call for a complete withdrawal of US troops?

The war is going to be an issue whether or not the Democrats want to go into deep denial about it!

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[frustrated_lefty]

30. We are going to be slaughtered on this issue

with Kerry.

Why didn't you stand up for what you believed in? Death knell. Somebody show me where Kerry has stood up for anything, and please don't pull out this tired Iran-Contra crap that NEVER made a front-page in major papers. It was something like A8 in the NYT. Yeah, he fought hard to get that message out.

[bigtree]

31. FWIW here's the congressional report

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/index.html


MORE …

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/11intel.htm



TABLE OF CONTENTS TO FULL REPORT:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/


EXCERPT:

On May 14, 1991, Senator Kerry wrote CIA Director Webster to again request the briefing paper on BCCI prepared by the CIA, as well as information on the CIA's own use of the bank. No reply was received in response to this letter from the CIA for over two months, during which BCCI was closed globally following its seizure in the United Kingdom by the Bank of England on July 5, 1991.


A Report by Senator John Kerry and Senator Hank Brown to the US Senate’s Committee on Foreign Relations, concluded that: Hill and Knowlton partners knew of BCCI's reputation as a "sleazy" bank when it accepted the account in October, 1988; Hill and Knowlton “made contacts with Capitol Hill on behalf of First American, and BCCI's lawyers, Clark Clifford and Robert Altman, on issues pertaining to BCCI”, despite publicly claiming that they undertook no lobbying operations on behalf of BCCI; and in the process of assisting BCCI with an aggressive public relations campaign designed to demonstrate that BCCI was not a criminal enterprise, and to put the best face possible on the Tampa drug money laundering indictments, “Hill and Knowlton ended up providing information to the Congress and to the press and public that was not merely misleading or distorted, but actually false. Hill and Knowlton assisted in discrediting people who were providing accurate information about the underlying situation, including a former BCCI officer, an investigative journalist and his publisher. Given Hill and Knowlton's close ties to both political parties, and its influence in Washington, this was especially unfortunate.”"

http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/profiles/hk/hk4.htm


Books of note
A Full Service Bank: How BCCI Stole Billions Around the World
by James Ring Adams, Douglas Frantz (Contributor), Jane Chelius (Editor)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671729128/qid=1043078199/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/002-0326214-5431272

False Profits: The Inside Story of BCCI, the World's Most Corrupt Financial Empire
by Peter Truell, Larry Gurwin (Contributor)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0395623391/qid=1043078199/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-0326214-5431272?v=glance&s=books

The Outlaw Bank: A Wild Ride into the Secret Heart of BCCI
by Jonathan Beaty, S. C. Gwynne (Contributor)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0679413847/qid=1043078199/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_3/002-0326214-5431272?v=glance&s=books

Dirty Money: BCCI: The Inside Story of the World's Sleaziest Bank
by Mark Potts, Nicholas Kochan, Robert Whittington (Contributor), Nick Kochan (Contributor)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0915765993/qid=1043078199/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/002-0326214-5431272?v=glance&s=books

Banking Scandals: The S&Ls and BCCI (The Reference Shelf, Vol 65, No. 3)
by Robert Emmet Long (Editor)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0824208420/qid=1043078199/sr=1-7/ref=sr_1_7/002-0326214-5431272?v=glance&s=books

The BCCI affair : hearings before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Operations of the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, One Hundred Second Congress, first session
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0160372550/qid=1043078199/sr=1-9/ref=sr_1_9/002-0326214-5431272?v=glance&s=books


Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) investigation : hearing before the Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Second Congress, first session
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0160376653/qid=1043078199/sr=1-10/ref=sr_1_10/002-0326214-5431272?v=glance&s=books

[IndianaGreen]

33. That was 14 years ago! Kerry has a lightweight legislative record.

Kerry's Senate Career Short on Law-Making
Monday, July 21, 2003


WASHINGTON — Asked what he has accomplished during his 19 years in the Senate, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (search) gives a lengthy answer but has a short list of laws that bear his name.

<snip>

Kerry has been the lead sponsor of eight bills that have become law. Two are related to his work on the Senate panel on oceans and fisheries - a 1994 law to protect marine mammals from being taken during commercial fishing and a 1991 measure for the National Sea Grant College Program Act (search), which finances marine research.

In 1999, President Clinton signed his bill providing grants to support small businesses owned by women.

The rest of the laws he saw passed were ceremonial - renaming a federal building, designating Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day, National POW/MIA Recognition Day (search) and World Population Awareness Week in two separate years.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92477,00.html

[frustrated_lefty]

34. I freely admit

that was the ONE good bit of service he did his country. But why the hell didn't he push it onto the front page of any paper or magazine? It got covered by 3 major outlets, and the closest it came was A8. A truism we've gained from the Dean camp is "we can do better than that." We could and SHOULD have done better than that.

Look, affiliations aside, Iran-Contra was nasty business. Kerry settled for A8 and didn't get behind his report. He could have made a report go public, but didn't. But now, when he has something to win, he mortgages his (wife's) house. He doesn't stand by his convictions. He'll get my vote if it comes to it, but it will be a remorseful one. I'd be behind this man if he had ever shown the least indication of chutzpah. This just feels like
"meet the new boss,
same as the old boss."

If you guys think I'm off base, tell your guy to get out there and start showing some balls and not his wife's money.

[Adjoran]

32. While IG has an axe to grind

his points are valid.

Bush now has a 52% positive rating in California. The repubs are suddenly talking about a "viable" campaign there.

I respect and admire John Kerry. He is obviously qualified for the Presidency. If nominated, he will have my full support.

As a candidate, though, he does present some weaknesses that aren't necessarily apparent in Democratic primaries.

I was particularly disturbed by his remarks about ignoring the south. "Al Gore proved you can win without the south." Excuse me, but I didn't see President Gore giving the SOTU last week. The only way Gore WON was with FLORIDA, which is a southern state. All Gore proved is that it was mathematically possible to win with only ONE southern state - not "without the south."

We have five open Senate seats in the south this election. If our nominee writes off the south, we could be looking at a filibuster-proof Senate in 2005. That is not acceptable. Think of the judicial nominations that would fly through.

Kerry could partially allay these concerns by winning SC next week, of course. But not completely.



I don't pay any attention to Fred Barnes, but if the examples he cites are correct, we'll be seeing them this fall. Over and over.

[krkaufman]

35. MISLEADING thread subject

The subject heading for this thread is misleading, George. It says "CBS News"; however, it's an op-ed piece written by Fred Barnes of 'The Weekly Standard.'

(The Weekly Standard) This column from The Weekly Standard was written by Fred Barnes.

Let's be sure to vet the articles and call attention to right-wing sources, as required by the forum policy.

[IndianaGreen]

41. It is published by CBS News

and it is on the CBS News website.

Are the Kerry supporters intending to manage and spin information in the same way Bush has? What's the difference between Bush and Kerry then?

[krkaufman]

44. Not a Kerry supporter

IG, I'm not a Kerry supporter; I support Clark.

Personally, I realized that it wasn't a "CBS News" article when my face started twitching a few sentences in. Once I noticed the true source of the article, I felt that the absence of a disclaimer as to the source of the article, especially in light of the "CBS News" in the subject title, was misleading.

Also, I was working from the perspective that not identifying the article as having come from a known right-wing source conflicts with the following rule for the GD2004 forum:

7. You may not post any material from extreme right-wing sources, specifically WorldNetDaily.com, Newsmax.com, FreeRepublic.com, and their ilk. Material from more "mainstream" conservative writers or sources, such as The Washington Times and Fox News, are permitted as long as the post includes a clear warning about the source. (For example: "WARNING: Please note that this article is written by George Will.")

Cheers..!

[IndianaGreen]

45. The opening paragraph on the thread says

The opening paragraph on the thread says:

The following article by conservative columnist Fred Barnes clearly illustrates the most problematic aspects of a Kerry candidacy were he to become the Democratic nominee. Kerry will be savaged by the Left and the Right for his many flip-flops on the issues.

I think that Barnes's characterization of Kerry as "the Great Explainer" is right on target!

[isbister]

39. This time I voted to give the authority...

"This time I voted to give the authority to the president to use force under a set of promises by the president as to how he would do it," Kerry said. These were to "build a legitimate international coalition, exhaust the remedies of the United Nations, and go to war as a last resort. He broke every single one of those promises." The White House, of course, insists he met all those standards. Again, Kerry voted with the majority of Democrats.

Did bush meet them? No! No matter what Fred or bush say.

[IndianaGreen]

42. What did Kerry do when the war began?

What did Kerry do when Bush forced the UN to pull the inspectors out of Iraq?

Whatever excuses Kerry gives for his IWR vote, a vote that was characterized as a "war vote" by Ted Kennedy on CNN Wednesday, Kerry cannot excuse his silence and his lack of action after Bush forced the UN inspectors out of Iraq and after the invasion began.

Kerry was cheerleading for the war then, and he went on cheerleading as the American invasion force went all the way to Baghdad. Kerry only stopped after it became obvious that the Iraqis did not want us as colonial occupiers.

[regnaD kciN]

49. And it doesn't matter if he did or didn't...

Kerry voted to give Bush full authority to wage war whenever he chose, without further checks by Congress. Kerry may say as often as he wants that he was attaching a whole series of conditions to his support -- the problem is, those conditions weren't in the bill, so they were worth nothing.

And, as much as Kerry dislikes the "blank check" analogy, that's exactly the proper way to look at it. It's like a father giving a college-age child a blank check, with the "understanding" that it is only to be used to buy that semester's textbooks. If the child, instead, cleans out the bank account to buy himself a Ferrari, the father can claim all he wants that he hadn't given the check for the child to do that with it -- regardless, his money's gone, and there's nothing he can do about it.

I know that one of the main themes of the Kerry campaign in reaching out to liberals is his insistence (as first published in Will Pitt's "Trial of John Kerry") that he voted for IWR, not out of a calculated and cynical attempt to "move to the center," but because he was completely duped by the promises of the Bush administration. Call it a new version of "Seduced and Abandoned"...a sympathetic tale of a wide-eyed innocent who trusted not wisely but too well. The problem is, I don't believe a word of it, however "sincerely" Kerry is able to spin it to his followers. Kerry, as head of VVAW, saw and experienced all-too-clearly the horrific quagmire that began with Congress's approval of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, a bill which, despite the intentions of the legislators who approved it overwhelmingly as a "patriotic" gesture, was used by two unscrupulous administrations as a "blank check" to ramp up the Vietnam war and keep it going for almost a decade, despite, eventually, clear public sentiment against it. Put bluntly, Kerry saw, and decried, Johnson's and Nixon's manipulation of a Congressional resolution to wage war against the wishes of the American people -- now, we're supposed to believe that he would give full trust to Bush in the same circumstances??? Sorry, I don't buy it. In the immortal words of Jim Hightower, I was born at night, but it wasn't last night!

:grr:

[bearfartinthewoods]

46. there is a song begging to be satirized

'oh yes....i'm the great pretender'

could be worked into the grat explainer with ease.

[Cheswick2.0]

48. That about sums it up

just add how arrogant and unappealing he is (throw in the phony new face)and we are toast in November if he is the nominee.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

50. "That was politics" Explains John Kerry.

Just a cheap politician blowing with the wind.

[underpants]

51. FRED BARNES?!?!? Are you kidding me?

This article (and yes I did read it) is pure tripe. Barnes discounts everything he has said before offering the quotes and ignores what he said afterwards. I don't agree with EVERYTHING KErrey has said and done but his explanations work.

[HPLeft]

52. I think Fred Barnes needs to address...

why no one is demanding that Dubya tell us about going AWOL, or his wild and crazy past. For instance, could his paranoia in pursuing Hussein have been a side-effect of long-term cocaine use?

Could his recklessness is cutting taxes while continuing to spend like a drunken sailor indicate that he's still high?

Every candidate has contradictions. IMHO, Howard Dean happens to have many more of them than the average Democrat, but since the initial attack is coming from right-wing ideologue like Barnes, I'll choose to focus my weapon on Dubya rather than Deanya.

I look forward to a national campaign. If this is the best trash that the likes of Barnes can come up with, Kerry supporters have only three words in response:

BRING IT ON!

[underpants]

53. This is Fred Barnes we are talking about

As soon as I saw his named attached to this red flags shot up. As I said in my post above this whole article is crap tripe meaningless and faulty.

[dansolo]

54. What will Kerry do about new tax cuts this year?

The Republicans in Congress will push legislation to make the middle class tax cuts permanent. But they will very likely make other taxes permanent as well (i.e. the ones that benefit the wealthy). Kerry's position is a lose-lose scenario. If he votes against tax cuts, he will be attacked by Bush for wanting to increase taxes on the middle class (the same argument Kerry uses on Dean). If he votes for it, then he loses credibility on the argument about repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

[flpoljunkie]

55. Why would CBS News be running attack article from the Weekly Standard?

Fred Barnes, one of the"Beltway Boys", is a right wing hack who is also one of the "All Star" panelists on Brit Hume's Faux News hour.

Disgusting.

[edzontar]

56. I am reluctant to join the bashing--but Kerry is very vulnerable

To attacks from all size because his record is so detailed and so contradictory.

His attmepts to explain how he can 1. vote for Bush's war and 2. oppose that same war are confusing, boring, and unconvincing, at least to my ears.

I fear he will lose in a landslide od epic proportions....our own rank and file, flocking like lemmings to the false promise of "Electability," may well be dooming us and our country to four years of an ELECTED Bush regime.