|
|
Swamp Gas
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 4254
Location: On a Hill in the Lowlands |
The Mask Starts to Come off Kerry
 Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:34 pm
|
 |
|
Here we go again! 
Another wolf in sheep's clothing.
Seems like Kerry is intent on turning the USA further in a Military Lockdown, equal to the Bushistas.
We should have known. The ticket could have been Kucinich/Ron Paul. but we are left with somebody who will defeat Bush, but a what cost? All the Liberals, Moderate Conservatives, Old Hippies, and Beatniks will be rejoicing that we dumped Bush, but are left with someone who will continue the complete transformation of America from a Technology and Manufacturing Leader into a Giant Police Force. I just hope the rest of the world doesn't follow America, seeing how much the rest of the world hates Bush.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ca/election/story/8350513p-9280396c.html
Kerry lays out plan on terror
Assailing Bush's efforts, he calls for more troops and police officers.
By Dan Smith -- Bee Deputy Capitol Bureau Chief
Published 2:15 a.m. PST Saturday, February 28, 2004
LOS ANGELES - Seeking to zero in on the differences between himself and a wartime president, Sen. John Kerry on Friday laid out a broad plan for dealing with threats both at home and abroad, and said President Bush has "fallen short" on his vow to protect Americans after the 2001 terrorist attacks.
The Massachusetts Democrat, looking to stretch his delegate lead in Tuesday's primary election in California and voting in nine other states, said he would add 40,000 military personnel and 200,000 police and firefighters to America's ranks. The CIA, moreover, would assume the undisputed lead in intelligence efforts and would launch "a major initiative in public diplomacy" to push "the next generation of Islamic youth" toward democracy, he said.
While Kerry had presented many elements of his plan in the past - most notably in December speeches in New York and New Hampshire - aides said Friday's address was intended to broaden his approach to terrorism and take more forceful aim at Bush as Kerry closes in on the nomination.
"Day in and day out, George W. Bush reminds us that he is a war president and that he wants to make national security the central issue of this election. I am ready to have this debate. I welcome it," Kerry told several hundred enthusiastic UCLA students at the Ronald W. Burkle Center for International Relations.
Bush, he said, has driven away America's allies, mishandled conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and failed in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the East Coast.
"Like all Americans, I responded to President Bush's reassuring words in the days after September 11th," Kerry said. "But since then, his actions have fallen short. I do not fault George Bush for doing too much in the war on terror; I believe he's done too little."
The Bush campaign said Kerry's attacks were misguided, hypocritical and an attempt to rewrite his own history of opposing defense measures he now touts, noting that the 20-year veteran of the Senate has cast dozens of votes to cut the nation's defense.
The campaign detailed 38 votes in which Kerry agreed to cut or eliminate funding for defense.
While Kerry asserted Friday that military families have had to pay for their own body armor, the Bush campaign said that he voted against a body armor spending measure just last year.
"John Kerry's speech ignored his own voting record that would undermine the nation's war on terror," said Tracey Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the Bush campaign. "His rhetoric is out of touch with his record."
Kerry noted reports that have forces closing in on Osama bin Laden.
"We've heard that news before," Kerry said. "We had him in our grasp more than two years ago - definitively within our grasp -- at Tora Bora, but George Bush held U.S. forces back and, instead, called on Afghan warlords with no loyalty to our cause to finish the job."
Kerry promised "a stronger, more comprehensive and more effective strategy for winning the war on terror than the Bush administration has ever envisioned."
Even if bin Laden is captured or killed, Kerry said, "it will not be the end of the war on terror. This war isn't just a manhunt, a checklist of names from a deck of cards. ... We face the global jihadist movement of many groups from different sources."
Kerry said his CIA chief would be "a true director of national intelligence with real control of intelligence personnel and budgets."
He called for 40,000 more active-duty troops - at least until the end of the decade - to spell and supplement "overextended" American forces abroad.
He also promised to make the United States "energy independent" from the Middle East within 10 years "so our sons and daughters will never have to fight and die for it."
The Bush administration, he asserted, has "allowed things to spiral downward" in the Middle East, and Kerry vowed to treat Israel as a "special ally" and appoint "a special envoy the quality of Bill Clinton, for instance - someone who can help us to elevate this discussion."
Better relations with Latin America "begins with having an administration that knows where Latin America is," Kerry said. "He used to brag about his relationship with (Mexican) President (Vicente) Fox, but of course when President Fox had a difference with him over Iraq, all of a sudden we weren't talking about anything."
As he did in Thursday's Democratic debate, Kerry said the Bush administration has "empowered the insurgents" in Haiti because of "a combined theological and ideological hatred of President (Jean-Bertrand) Aristide." He said the United States should have worked harder for a diplomatic solution and dispatched an international force to keep the peace.
On homeland defense, he said he would fight to add money for 100,000 additional firefighters, to restore funding for another 100,000 police officers and to provide local public health agencies the "basic expertise they need but now lack to respond to chemical or biological attack."
Schmitt of the Bush campaign replied that the president had demonstrated "an unprecedented commitment to homeland security," noting that local security funding had tripled since 2001.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by swamp gas on 02-28-2004] |
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Sat Feb 28, 2004 7:14 pm
|
|
|
I was suspicious the momement Tim Russert asked him about his SKULL and BONES affiliation...to which he replied..
"Its a secret and I cant talk about it"
Almost exact words of BUSH during HIS interview. |
| |
|
|
Swamp Gas
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 4254
Location: On a Hill in the Lowlands |
|
Sat Feb 28, 2004 7:18 pm
|
|
|
If I didn't know better, I would say that Bush is purposely screwing up, so the skeptics of this "Eternal War on Evil" would unconsciously back Kerry just as enthusiastically as the Conservatives backed Bush at first.
I'm beginning to see them on the same side. |
| |
|
|
shatoga
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 1291
|
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:10 am
|
|
|
From my background,
the choice between someone totally owned by the NWO/mob
and someone only peripherally connected to the NWO/mob?
I prefer the guy who may not have sold his sould completely (as bush clearly has sold his soul)
the small chance that we can defeat thm versus no chance at all.
why bother?
any chance beats none at all.
one of our political parties has sold out entirely to the NWo.
the other is partially sold out to the NWO.
Choose the partially sold out and change or eliminate them.
it beats selling your own soul out to the political party that has almost totally sold out to the NWO.
questions?
Re-read and search your own souls.
use the Torah, Bible or Koran to assuage any concerns about opposing the ultimate evil:
the Bush New World Order IS the ultimate evil!
Evil incarnate?
George W Bush!/Henry Kissinger/ Communist China (same/same/same= same goals, same alma mater, same lack of morals and principles)
Any vote that enables George W Bush to retain office is exactly like voting for Mao Tse Tung! |
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:13 am
|
|
|
In other words...
Vote for Kerry and then run to the nearest toilet.
Bush or Kerry...you still get the New World Order.
There has to be a better way. |
| |
|
|
shatoga
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 1291
|
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:26 am
|
|
|
balance
the guy who both fought the war and then opposed the war
(showing a thinking person who has a conscience/ like my own personal journey)
vs/
the guy who spent the war in Mexican houses of ill repute and worse, who now sends others to fight and die for far less reason.
What was the argument for letting Bush and his NWO party continue to rule unnopposed?
How does any of us let the ultimate evil rule unnoposed?
It it because the only viable option is a lesser evil/ which is still evil?
pay attention please.
LESSER means LESS
Lesser evil means less evil than the NWO Bush administration which has already sacrificed thousands of innocent lives merely to enrich the military industrial complex.
Argue that not pure enough to oppose the devil himself is what/
Vote for anyone other than the (R)party that exultantly lets the NWO rule America!
|
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:36 am
|
|
|
You said: "pay attention please."
"LESSER means LESS."
Evil is still evil Shatoga.
Nothing short of A revolution by the people of the United States and ESPECIALLY Flag Officers are going to fix things here.
The Democrats are just good at hiding the evil..the Republicans simply do it out in the open.
Two different flavors lead to the same destruction of the Republic.
That is the New World Orders goal.
Untill that plan is exposed in every aspect of politics and especially in the mainstreaam media we will have a hard time turning the tide.
That means understanding what the NWO actually is and all of its mechanisms.
Its a GLOBAL Octopus.
We have to get LOUDER and LOUDER.
But blindly obeying politicians just because "they are less evil" is something I will not do.
I say expose what they REALLY are at every opportunity and shine a light in ALL the cracks. Don't let them get away with NOTHING.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Mech on 02-29-2004] |
| |
|
|
shatoga
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 1291
|
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 9:40 am
|
|
|
We look from opposite sides Mech,
Republicans tell us the lies we want to hear.
Democrats tell us the truths we don't want to hear.
the difference is between democrats doing it out in the open, and taking responsibility, and republicans doing it and blaming democrats.
I have been on both sides.
Have you?
I still am well connected in the right wing and also a member of the democratic national Committee.
I know For a fact the DNC repeatedly tried to get the NRA to support a national concealed carry permit.
The NRA choose to keep all gun issues a wedge issue solely to benefit Republicans.
the 2nd year I was involved in the failed negotiations,
I decided the "NRA" has become the "Nutcase Republicans Against" expanding law abiding gun owners' freedoms.
(part of changing sides/ I currently hold an NRA "eagle" membership card)
Seeing both sides from the inside,
i have chosen the side that cannot ever become a "one party rule' dictatorship.
Democrats never lockstep to the orders of the leadership like Republicans so often do
Only twice in history have Democrats all voted the same way on any bill.
Once was to create Social Security with only one brave Republican voting with them (his career ended that day)
the second time was to balance the budget and end the runaway deficits of the borrow ans spend Reagan/Bush administrations
Even when Democrats held the White House, Senate and House;
in 1992,
they were unable to pass the desperately needed health insurance for all americans.
why?
Two reasons;
One: each of them believes he or she is the only one who sees clearly and has the answers
Two;
they sell out on an individual basis
(the worst sell-outs among them become
Republicans) just like Republicans sell out on a collective basis.
collective corruption with taxpayers footing the bill (R)
or
pay as you go government (D)
a simple choice!
NWO has it's tentacles in both sides.
rampant exultant NWO-Republicans
or
unwilling NWO-influenced Democrats
choose the lesser of two evils?
Easy choice
lesser evil beats ultimate evil.
any other option is ultimate evil via third party surrogates!
|
| |
|
|
Swamp Gas
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 4254
Location: On a Hill in the Lowlands |
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 6:56 pm
|
|
|
Odd that The Netherlands has something like 24 Parties, and perhaps the most representative government of the people on the planet.
Same with Scandanavian Countries...The highest Longetivity and highest student scores.
I understand the need to dump Bush, but it could be that each preceding president sets ups the NWO takeover for the nexy one. Look at Reagan forward. Each one gets the trust one of the Conservative-Liberal dichotomy, and then screws the elected base. Surveillance State set up under Nixon and Clinton.
Kerry will do NOTHING to stop NAFTA/GATT. Jobs will still be outsourced. He and Edwards voted FOR the Patriot Act. He will still jail pot smokers. He will keep abortion legal. He's opposed to gay marriage. More police. More military spending. More CIA (in his words). It will further delineate the left and the right. He says he is for helping the environment, like Gore, but how well did Clinton/Gore do for the environment? Slightly better than Bush, and that's not saying much. With that slime bucket Joe Biden backing him, that is enough reason to be suspect.
ON outsourcing he is proposing the law which makes a company give you a 3 month notice when, where, and why your job is being outsourced. Whooopie!!!!!
Kerry's wife should be president, as I've heard her speak, and she goes against the old Bonesman in some areas. Smarter and more humane than Hillary.
Difference between Bush and Kerry...Abortion Rights? Environment? Culture Wars?
We seem to be headed away from foreign intervention with Kerry, but it sure seems like he wants a police state at home.
On the Nader issue. I see him as Kucinich, someone to keep these candidates on their toes. Kucinich and Sharpton won't be there for the final debates, but Nader will.
So the ultimate question...Who to vote for? I say let's watch the next 6 months as more masks will be taken off, and others will be put on.
[Edited 5 times, lastly by swamp gas on 02-29-2004] |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 10:02 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
