Kerry straddles Israel's fence.More Flip-Flopin, No flip-flop?U make call

[Bombtrack]

http://slate.msn.com/id/2095977/

Kerry on the Fence: Has Kerry actually flip-flopped on the issue of Israel's security barrier? Or is it just a straddle? Here's the Jerusalem Post story. You make the call.

Summary: In October, Kerry told the Arab American Institute:

We don't need another barrier to peace. Provocative and counterproductive measures only harm Israelis' security over the long term, increase the hardships to the Palestinian people, and make the process of negotiating an eventual settlement that much harder.

Now, with the New York primary coming up, Kerry proclaims "Israel's security fence is a legitimate act of self defense, No nation can stand by ..." etc. etc.--though Kerry says "President Bush is rightly discussing with Israel the exact route of the fence to minimize the hardship."

The J. Post story has some pro-Kerry spin about how these statements are perfectly consistent. (Who knew that when Kerry said "We don' t need another barrier to peace" he was actually approving the security barrier!) But even if the positions are logically compatible, wouldn't it be more admirable and constructive to tell the Arabs that a barrier is legitimate and tell the Jews that the route of the fence is wrong? Or tell both audiences both parts?

The predictability of Kerry's flip-flopping gives him an odd sort of meta-consistency. You could set your watch by this guy! And I do think Kerry's pandering flips, of which this is an example, are comparatively benign. In an all out panderflip, after all, a politician is telling a group of voters "You're the boss." He's treating them with respect. Too often Kerry practices a different, more fraudulent, kind of pander--e.g. ostentatiously declining limited PAC contributions while loading up on unlimited "soft" money--that treats voters as imbeciles who are easily fooled. ... 8:02 P.M.

[A J]

1. I think Kerry has very nuanced arguments

I voted for Edwards, but I respect Kerry. I think he makes these very long arguments that asses both sides fairly. Some may see it as flip flopping, but i don't.

I sure like i better than Bush's "good vs. evil" argument on everything.

[Cuban_Liberal]

2. I hope the voting public is as charitable.

Kerry's 'nuances' will strike the ordinary voting public as 'flip-flops', I fear. :scared:

[A J]

12. My fears exactly

I think Edwards has a stronger, more stable message that would do better with independent voters.

[Cuban_Liberal]

13. He does.

Many may not agree with a given position of his, but there's little confusion about where he stands on that position.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

17. 'assess'

and this is one issue with a lot to assess.

[A J]

18. Ha!

Freudian slip?

Maybe.....

[sadiesworld]

3. Where to start...

The fact that the whole article is a hit piece on Kerry? That the quote is from the Jerusalem Post? The "...etc., etc...."? Sorry, I'm not buying.

[David Dunham]

4. Kerry needs lots of Jewish support to beat Bush. It's that simple.

[BL_Zebub]

5. We take you now to Kerry campaign HQ for reaction to this story....

[dionysus]

10. lololololol

[emulatorloo]

6. My call is I don't like Mickey Maus or care much for Microsoft Slate

He apparently hates Kerry and will say whatever until his mission is accomplished.

While I have seen a (very) few interesting articles there, Microsoft Slate is no more of a credible source for me than Microsoft NBC, or the Microsoft Web Site.

[DuctapeFatwa]

7. Kerry has bravely stood up to bush for not supporting sharon enough

When bush made an ill-advised comment suggesting that sharon should show restraint when using US-supplied helicopter gunships in residential areas during routine assassinations, Kerry courageously joined most of his colleagues in signing an immediate letter to bush upbraiding and reprimanding him for the offensive remark.

Kerry stands solidly behind unconditional support for whatever the Israeli government wishes to do to whomever it wishes to do it, regardless of outdated notions like Geneva or international law.

To suggest otherwise is to do a grave disservice to Kerry's unshakable commitment to the security of America's strategic natural resources in the region.

[revcarol]

11. You're right. Heaven forbid that we should actually try to RESTRAIN

Israel from attacking civilian homes, especially with made-in-America weaponry.!!

The Palestinians might think that we had it in for them. Allow unrestricted killing, courtesy of our "even-handed" military aid!!

Kerry is a total NUT on this issue. Over and out.

[Soloflecks]

8. He seems totally pro Israel.

http://www.counterpunch.org/kerry02172004.html

"In this difficult time we must again reaffirm we are enlisted for the duration--and reaffirm our belief that the cause of Israel must be the cause of America--and the cause of people of conscience everywhere."

So, if Israel wants a fence, he must be for it. He and we can't have it both ways.

[Bombtrack]

9. I'm a pro-Israel democrat, and I can accept other democrats being

pro-Israel, not Likudniks like Lieberman, but having a realist viewpoint about the whole situation.

What I can't take is Kerry's obvious pattern of trying be and sound like everything to every audience, and not letting people get any evidence that he does in fact have firm beliefs that trump his opportunism

[waldenx]

14. Kerry supporters don't give a shit about anything

As long as the Republican media keeps telling them he is "electable."
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

[Capn Sunshine]

15. Just out of curiousity

how do you call THIS a "fence"?

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1059480548449_2003/08/01/2n_wall,0.jpg

[Forkboy]

16. You're behind on your terms

now it's a Freedom Wall.