Kerry made my local news with his Iran comment from yesterday

[LittleClarkie]

Sadly, the freeper radio guys only mentioned his comment, in which he said "Iran has made a dangerous and silly decision of confronting not just the U.S. government but the entire international community," so that so that they could shout "Now remember he said that!"

Same reaction Rush had to finding a 1997 speech where Kerry said "We have to hold Saddam responsible."

Simplistic bastards. Saying that Saddam needed to be held to his agreement to allow inspections, and saying that the Iranian president has made a bad choice, does not mean that Kerry is advocating a "YEEE HAW! GIT R DUN!!" foreign policy.

They'd rather he had flowers in his hair and was unrealistic about our relations with Middle Eastern countries. After all, everyone knows Democrats can't be trusted with foreign policy. We think we should just have therapy sessions with terrorists. Who does Kerry think he's trying to fool? He only wants to do what Bush is already doing anyway.

Why do things have to be so binary with these people. And I'm so sick of being told what I believe, like I need some freeper to explain myself and my beliefs to me. "Well, if it was up to you Democrats, we wouldn't be doing anything." There are a whole realm of possibilies between doing nothing and running into a country like you're Yosemite Sam.

And now, my brain hurts from trying to figure out their pretzel logic. I'd say they, like Bush, could just choke on that pretzel if only innocent lives didn't hang in the balance.

[blm]

1. Everyone knows Kerry is a UN man and wants Iran to be dealt with as a UN

situation. I hear his words as a warning to Iran to get right with the UN because Bush will use any infraction of UN standards to claim the right to invade.

That part will always be lost on the rightwing.

Personally, I expect BushInc has operatives in Iran already who will instigate fundamentalists there to attack Israel so Bush gets his excuse to invade.

[tatertop]

3. Iran is in total compliance. What the hell is he talking about?

[blm]

4. Hope they are and hope they stay that way. They should stick like glue to

the UN for the next few years.

BTW...you should learn to distinguish between the warnings from LONGTIME advocates of nonproliferation who want to prevent war and the warnings from war profiteers. They are NOT EQUAL.

[tatertop]

5. Kerry's position can be seen as a call to escalate NOW

How else can it be viewed.
This is both very dangerous and very foolish
as Bush ramps up the disastrous invasion of Iran.
Didn't he learn his lesson about appearing to support
disastrous wars from the Iraq fiasco?
We will see this clip again and again
in the future. They will clobber us with it.
What in the hell was Kerry thinking?

Moreover, Iran IS in total compliance:

Please note this from today's article in ABCNews:

"Cooperating with snap U.N. inspections is voluntary on Iran's part and halting them would not violate its international treaty obligations. However, it would reduce Iran's cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog to the legal minimum."

Entire article here:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1501872

[blm]

6. Wasn't that the point of the thread? His remarks will never be given

context by the media.

Why does our own side want to do the same?

[LittleClarkie]

7. Because being binary isn't just a phenomenon of the right wing

I don't think Iran is pure as the driven snow. And it isn't Kerry who needs to "learn his lesson" because he was not "appearing to agree" with Bush, he was pointing out that "yes, Saddam is an asshole but no, what we did was stupid" just as now he's saying "yes, the Iranian president is a moonbat, but no, let's avoid the mistakes we made with Iraq."

Once again, there is a choice between naively assuming that every world leader is always telling the truth about their intentions (gee, we wouldn't know anything about THAT, now would we?), and shouting "let loose the marmosets of war!"

[tatertop]

10. That is why he never should have said it in the first place

By all reports I have seen, Iran is ten years from
producing a nuclear weapon. They are currently in total and absolute compliance, therefore there is no need to even be discussing
UN sanctions at this time.
(I am still unclear as to why Iran should not be permitted to
develop nuclear weapons.)

The last thing we need to be doing
RIGHT NOW is lending any support whatever
to Bush's invasion of Iran.
Kerry should be screaming bloody murder-
night and day- to get us OUT of Iraq.
First things first. If Bush has his way, Iran will be
utterly trashed before he leaves office.

[LittleClarkie]

11. Kerry knows more about terrorism than Bush will EVER know

If he's saying this now, there's a reason.

Knowledge of these things came as a byproduct of his investigations into Iran/Contra and BCCI. Read "A New War" and see what I mean.

You see, if terrorism was a concern, we elected the wrong guy.

If almost ANYTHING is an issue, we elected the wrong guy.

But then, we already knew that.

[seabeyond]

12. i am curious what went before and after this sentence. arent you?

maybe it made sense, maybe what kerry had said before and after was brilliant and right on. i DONT know becuase i havent seen it yet, so i dont know how to rip kerry a new asshole without knowing why i am ripping him a new asshole.

how do you blindly argue soemthing

makes no sense

[tatertop]

19. Come in here:

One of many many examples when you Google:

Kerry Campaign Blasts Bush On Iran
Published: 9/22/2004

"WASHINGTON, Sept 22 (AFP) - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's campaign blasted the Bush administration Wednesday for "another national security failure" on Iran's nuclear program and urged that Tehran be threatened with tougher sanctions."
http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=28051

Kerry has been pushing for tougher sanctions for well over a year.
Don't you think he is playing right into Bush's hands?

[blm]

13. He's pushing Iran to stick with the UN - big difference. If you were aware

of his decades long push for greater nonproliferation than you would be more understanding. Kerry's been making several of these stop proliferation trips a year for many years now. Surely you must have noticed.

And Dean didn't scream like a crazed man, either, and media isn't going to convince me he did.

[seabeyond]

8. with iran mouthing off, are you suggesting our dems sit back and ignore

it. say we dont need to deal with it. what iran is doing is ok.

i have been thinking how the dems can handle this latest fiasco with iran. it feels like bush put a call in to iran and said, say a bunch of stupid things to get my people worked up. dems have to say something. address it. if you think we are preceived as weak now, if we say, ah iran, they are just goshin with us. tis their way of being funny,..... not going to work politically

so what do you suggest the dems unite to say

[LittleClarkie]

9. After all, world leaders are ALWAYS honest about their intentions

:sarcasm:

Take Dubya for example. Please.

[tatertop]

15. We need to get down to the business of getting out of Iraq

That is a REAL objective.
We gave Bush an inch and he took the ruler.
I suggest to you that most Americans are so unaware as to
really not care all that much about the babblings from Iran.
Bush has been threatening Iran with war-talk since day one.
Certainly they have to let us know that, unlike Iraq, they are
going to fight. And they are going to fight dirty - just like we do.

The time is now to get the heck out of Iraq. That is job one, two, three, and four. (And five.)

I see it this way:
If we can't pull the plug on Iraq we are definitely going into Iran.
And that will be horrible in ever way.

[seabeyond]

20. i said above, i need to hear what kerry said. people have consistanly

lied about every word that comes out of kerrys mouth like walt below, being for the bombing before being against it. which is a jab to what? voting for the war in iraq, (he didnt) or the comment, voted 87 b before voting agianst it. that is the stupidest we fellow dems put on kerry and the media protrays of kerry, knowing they were two seperate bills he voted on.

because americans and media are being assholes and purposely stupid for agenda cannot be put on kerry;s shoulder

maybe he suggested exactly what you said. maybe it was iran is doing this but gotta deal with iraq and pull troops out yada yada

gotta know what he says before i can bash him

[blm]

31. And why do you think Kerry WENT to see leaders in that region 3wks BEFORE

Bush goes there?

He wants to get the truth from ON THE GROUND - what other leaders in the region are seeing and what they are willing to do and not do and what they know now. He will be in a better position to counter Bush when he comes back from his trip.

The last time he went to gather unfiltered info was last Sept when he went to Iraq and spoke to the commanders and soldiers on the ground, and Iraqi parliament members not loyal to BushInc. He returned and laid out a withdrawal plan that he submitted on the floor of the Senate.

[rock]

2. Sadly, it used to be the media

that would make sure such fine distinctions were made to the purblic. Alas, no more. Now if you're an idiot, you have no help.

[Walt Starr]

14. so now we'll hear about Kerry being for bombing Iran

before he was against it.

[LittleClarkie]

16. When he was never for it to begin with. How special will THAT be.

Just like during the campaign. I'm feeling almost nostalgic

[Walt Starr]

23. BINGO

Can;t win for loising with the bastard fascist WarPig and company.

[seabeyond]

17. oh darlin see how consistant you are

on rw talking point. how about being outraged that they dont factually give the info on kerry instead of buying it and bitchin along with media and repug

[Walt Starr]

22. Tell me true, if WarPig gets his war on Iran on and Kerry gets pissed

and lets the media know, won't those statements come back to haunt him?

[seabeyond]

24. i read the article. i read that he is saying bush has not been dealing

with iran which is a security risk. like they have been saying he isnt dealing with north korea or palestine isreal battle. just more of bush not doing anything wth areas of our world that have problems. bush failure. i saw nothing about attacking and war. if media takes what he says and paints it as you suggest, then WALT.... it is the medias wrong. kerry cannot just shut up, nor any other dem representitive because media lies, misrepresents... cause then people like you get pissed and tell our dems to throw fits or you will walk out. my gosh the tip toeing media and repugs and dems alike have our people doing, and still we will blame them for the others flaws or dishonesty or corruption or ineptness

just dont play the game walt

[Walt Starr]

25. We live in a world of sound bites

Tell me again, what was teh sound bite?

[seabeyond]

26. i cant honor that either walt and wont feed that bullshit. i just had

a brother tell me to stop son from thinking and reading. i wont promote that walt. wont accept it. if you insist our dems go to sound bite because of the conditioning of the nation, i will fight you every step of the way

[Walt Starr]

27. Then the Democrats will continue to lose every step of the way

The Republcians have figured out mass psychology and they consistently win. Why else would the fake crying bullshit by Alito's whore of a wife fly?

[seabeyond]

28. would you like teresa,hillary, chelsey to go out on media

and bo hoo a little. maybe we can smear mccain service record. maybe you would like our people to just blatantly lie to the people?????

what are you suggesting walkt

[Walt Starr]

29. I'm suggesting those Democrats who are in positions of leadership

take a lesson on how to speak from the Republicans and insure they have the appropriate sound bites laid out in every last utterance that comes out of their collective mouths.

[seabeyond]

34. and what.... media is going to grab hold, promote for the dems

cause they support the dems? total confusion here. we say dems did not take from abramoff. easy enough. what does media say, abromoff equal contributor......


dems have said plenty of catch phrase and none get on or will get on tv

dems get bashed, whether they do it or not, say it or not, the only consistency is they get bashed. i jsut dont got o blame the dem fro what they have NO control over

[Walt Starr]

35. You do not understand

Dems can't just throw "catch phrases" into what they say.

Dems must SPEAK IN SOUND BITES!

Anything you say should be able to be pulled out entirely from the context of what you are saying and be a good sound bite on its own.

[seabeyond]

36. when talking black and white, can do black and white sound bites

which is what you are suggesting,....... that mind think is a failure, ergo bush and repug history. dems arent black and white. they cant/wont talk sound bite because an issue is NOT a sound bite, and it is not black and white. three sentence. so.... how do we sound bite iraq

pull out of iraq

not pull out re locate in middle east so if need be we can go back in to help, or ... what ever murtha said, but

pull out

we got clobbered when dems were protrayed in sound bite of whole iraq issue to pull out

how else do we sound bite iraq but pull out.

dems cant sound bite
they cant lie.... like the repugs
it doesnt work, it isnt honest and can be seen on a dem

like the kerry throwing in mary cheney is a lesbian. was bust, cause wasnt kerry, came out sounding bad, and he was clobbered.

i just think you are wrong walt

[robbedvoter]

18. Kerry co-sponsored the Syria accountability Act (W can invade THEM)

so, why should I look for hidden meaning? Didn't he vote yes on IWR?
The media is not always guilty . When in doubt, check actions.

[LittleClarkie]

21. No hidden meanings. Just not looking toward freepers

for half truth's either.

[blm]

33. Do you have Kerry's direct reference to Iran from his IWR vote speech?

Would you mind posting it?

[Gloria]

30. Kerry also made some choice comments about the US-India Nuke deal...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x124899


From the new World Media Watch up now at http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical
Tomorrow at Buzzflash.com


3//The Times of India, India < Thursday, January 12, 2006 12:28:23 pm PTI >

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1368581....



INDIA GETS JOHN KERRY’S BACKING FOR INDO-US N-DEAL



NEW DELHI: Implementation of the Indo-US deal on civilian nuclear cooperation will mean grant of nuclear power status to India, influential American Senator and former Democrat Presidential candidate John Kerry said here on Thursday as he voiced support for the agreement.

Kerry told a press conference here that the deal, with "enormous benefits" bilaterally, cannot be seen only in the context of Indo-US relations but had implications at the global level.

SNIP

"I will be disingenous to suggest that if the (Indo-US) agreement (on civilian nuclear cooperation) comes through, it will not grant nuclear power status to India. Obviously, it does," he said.

Kerry, whose opposition Democratic Party will have a crucial role with regard to ratification of the deal in the US Congress, said he backed the agreement signed on July 18 last year by the two countries during the Prime Minister's visit to Washington.

"In principle, I support the deal. It is a great game, a positive game, for India, the US and the global community," he said.

The Senator said the deal cannot be seen only in the bilateral context as it has "impact broader than bilateral", involving the role of three important international bodies or agreements, particularly when "Iran and other compelling issues are on the table".

MORE

****

His comments about it all being a "great game" make me want to PUKE


"It is a great game, a positive game, for India, the US and the global community," he said.

Meanwhile, we're about to bomb Iran without one direct word of talk with them and Pakistan our little friend is full of nukes....

Wes Clark is saying what the Dems SHOULD be saying...that we haven't really engaged in real diplomacy with Iran and brought the other countries of the region into discussion. We have NEVER talked DIRECTLY to Iran...and Clark says that before we bomb someone, we should at least talk to them. If you present that logic to the public, they may catch on that BUSHCO IS NUTS. Clark says you may see the "appearance" of diplomacy, but it really is not a committment to diplomacy by these thugs. He also predicts Bush will get a real good boost in the polls from a bombing of Iran.

When do the DEMS preempt anything that Bushco does??? Either they are too disorganized or they know exactly what is going on (hell, Clark is trying to advise them) and the DO NOT WANT to voice opposition! You can bet that when the bombs fall, most of the DC Dems will go right along...you can see it in the Kerry language already.

If they later attempt to complain about any Iran action, they will be in the same spot they are vis-a-vis Iraq.

They are such losers....

[blm]

32. game? does that sound like Kerry talking or bad interpretation?

I guess everyone has forgotten that Kerry is THERE before Bush so Bush can't BULLSHIT his way into war.

The same people misinterpreting Clark's comments about Iraq will also surely misinterpret Kerry's.

My guess is that Kerry is gathering info to bring back and SHARE with allies like Clark. They're RARELY far apart on these issues. Has that escaped notice?

[sandnsea]

37. Yeah, Kerry said that a year ago

He would expect you to remember that. Iran is not helping itself with all these crazy comments and threats, just like Saddam didn't help himself when he did it. These countries need to start coming into the world community and Iran isn't. And I'd bet Wes Clark would say that too. Get a clue. I don't know what he meant by "great game", it frankly isn't language I've ever heard Kerry use. Perhaps he said "gain" and somebody heard him wrong, I don't know.