And mention factcheck.org too !
I love the following post cause it shuts up Bush supporters real good.
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx@DocID=268.html
Endlessly Changing Positions?
The charge that Kerry is "endlessly changing positions on Iraq" is without factual support. In fact, Kerry has never wavered from his support for giving Bush authority to use force in Iraq, nor has he changed his position that Bush should not have gone to war without greater international support, and without making greater efforts at diplomacy backed by the threat of force.
Here's what Kerry said on the Senate floor before voting to give Bush the authority:
Kerry (Oct. 9, 2002) Let there be no doubt or confusion about where we stand on this. I will support a multilateral effort to disarm him (Saddam) by force, if we ever exhaust those other options, as the President has promised, but I will not support a unilateral U.S. war against Iraq unless that threat is imminent and the multilateral effort has not proven possible under any circumstances.
That's consistent with Kerry's later criticism of Bush for failing -- as Kerry sees it -- to secure enough help and support from other countries. And that's been Kerry's position ever since.
Kerry did vote against $87 billion in emergency funds for Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003, and was criticized for inconsistency at the time even by Democratic rivals Lieberman and Gephardt. But Kerry has never advocated a quick withdrawal from Iraq as some of his other Democratic rivals did.
When the San Francisco Chronicle combed through 200 of Kerry's speeches and statements on Iraq, it found instances of "clumsy phrases and tortuously long explanations" that made Kerry's position difficult to follow. But it also found that "taken as a whole, Kerry has offered the same message ever since talk of attacking Iraq became a national conversation more than two years ago."
Even the Bush campaign had to edit Kerry's quotes egregiously out of context to make Kerry look inconsistent in an ad released Sept. 27, which we critiqued that day.
Intelligence Spending
As for cutting intelligence spending, it's true that Kerry proposed cuts in 1994 and 1995. The 1994 cut was part of an aggressive deficit-reduction package, and would have cut intelligence spending by 3.7% for six years. It was defeated.
The 1995 cut was smaller and would have amounted to a reduction of roughly 1%. This time cuts had bipartisan support, after it was discovered that intelligence officials had secretly hoarded more than $1 billion in unspent funds. A Republican-sponsored cut of $1 billion eventually became law as part of a House-Senate package endorsed by the Republican leadership.
Defense Spending
The announcer claims that Kerry "has a 30-year record of supporting cuts in defense and intelligence." But as we said in our first article on this subject back in February, "Since 1996, the John Kerry who once opposed the Apache helicopter and wanted to cut Tomahawk cruise-missile funds by 50% has evolved into a steady supporter of military budgets."
It's true that Kerry voted against the entire Pentagon appropriations bills in 1990 and 1995, and also voted against the Pentagon authorization bill (which provides authority to spend but not the actual money) in 1996. But in his nearly 20 years in the Senate Kerry has voted for Pentagon budgets far more often than he's opposed them, and hasn't voted against one for the past eight years.
(The ad's reference to a "30-year record" includes Kerry's unsuccessful 1972 campaign for the House, when he campaigned against US policy in the Vietnam war. Actually, he's been a senator only since January, 1985.)
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
