Well, and boy does it suck to defend Kerry, what he said isn't really different. Saddam was bad, and putting him in jail definitely makes us safer but (and of course, this is Kerry's view, not mine) attacking Iraq in the way we did made the French less willing to help us out, so we're not that safe.

I can say that putting a padlock on my house door makes me safer but not wearing seatbelts makes me less safe and not be flip-floppy.

Kerry is the new TiVo!

This is why I see little need for three debates as rhetoric is just going to be the mainstay. Even though it seems now that Kerry spent the last several weeks preparing for speeches and questions as to look like he has solidified his position, he comes off as reactionary and as one that simply says I’d do better.

I agree that Iraq needs to come together and soon, but I also think the news media needs to also show the positives going on in Iraq. I’m not one for sensitive war and think we need to strengthen our numbers in Iraq and make quickly the annihilation of the insurgents.

It is a good thing for the entire world that we fight the terrorist in Iraq and not on our homeland, but I would rather see more security on the borders of Iraq to stop these terrorist as they come into Iraq and to be able to prove where they are coming in from.

One thing that really bothers me is that the Iraqi people themselves don’t stand up against the terrorist being the terrorist are mostly foreigners and are killing Iraqis by the dozens. Why don’t they finger them for the US troops? If they want their country in some form of stability, this would be the quickest way.

Rich

There is little need for three debates (and I'm totally going to skip the "town hall" one. Yuck.) but it's going to make the differences more stark as time goes on. I don't know why Kerry thinks the debates are a good idea for him. I guess it's the ego thing again, and the sure knowledge that the media will say he won no matter what happens.

Of course, I don't think any voters will actually care what the media have to say about that.

As for making the French less likely to help - there's no probability less than 0% chance. Mathematically impossible, except for some weird quantum mechanical calculations, in which one can't observe anything anyway, so negative probability is not a problem... or so I remember from my classes. Hmmm, the Kerry Uncertainty Principle....

Take the pronoun "I" out of the English Language; John Forbes Kerry would be hard pressed to be able to speak...

10 Positions... No waiting...

SA

I love this post. You mistakenly typed "catering" instead of "cratering" in your second sentence, and it reads even better with the typo.

What I want to know is why none of those MSM reporters asked Kerry why he won't sign his Standard Form 180 and release all of his military records. Never mind, I just answered my own question. Because they're MSM reporters!

...And Kerry has more positions on Iraq than the Kama Sutra.

...catering is good!

How much does Senator Kerry charge?

Is it a part-time catering service; or does Momma T... cater ... also?

SA

Of course, Momma T caters.....

But you have to eat your food and water nekkid..... no clothes for you!

There is no doubt that the removal of Saddam Hussein is bringing matters to a head. Islamic fascists are now fighting openly and losing battles, and are increasingly desperate as they realize the democratization process slowly grinds ahead leaving them and what they have to offer by the wayside. Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and others must send aid to the terrorists and stealthy warriors into Iraq, for the battle is not just for Baghdad but for their futures as well. The world's attention is turning to Syria's occupation of Lebanon and Iran's nukes, a new scrutiny predicated on American initiatives and persistence, and easily evaporated by a withdrawal from Iraq. So by taking the fight to the heart of darkness in Saddam's realm, we have opened the climactic phase of the war, and thereupon can either win or lose far more than Iraq.

So he said, on the day Sadam was captured, that we were safer than the day before he was captured.
Now he says overall we are not safer having stirred up the hornets nest in Iraq than we were before we stirred up the hornets nest. Sorry, I don't see a contradiction there.

Sharpie--

You're right in a way- I snipped those quotes from one of Kevin's posts below. I thought was him attacking Dean for supporting the war and calling him unqualified to be commander in chief THEN Kerry saying he would not have gone after Saddam.

I spoke to Kev before he posted and I thought that's what he was going to post. I must confess I did not read them carefully in my haste. But don't worry I can come up with a few dozen different positions Kerry has on Iraq.

Edwiges, you have it right. The bottomline is: Do we fight Islamists in the Middle East or do we fight the Islamofanatics here in the USA. Good thing Kerry and his minions weren't around during the Battle of the Bulge.

This is Kerry's "I AM MY OWN MAN" moment... if you have to say it, it's not true and too late.

Kerry's new position is almost missionary.
Lurch looked and sounded like he was fed a peyote milksake.
Dry mouthed and absolutely hallucinatory responce to magnificently important issues.
All that was mising was flop sweat raining down his frankenstoinian face at 10 inches a minute.
This FRAUD does not want to be where he is.
Watch him, he can barely contain himself in his own skin.
Dean vaporized and Lurch was on deck with a frikkin' toothpick.
Who ya gonna call?
Her Thighness?
Case.
Closed.
2008......Here is hoping we are still posting.

First, it's not a lock that Bush is going to win. Polls are just guesses, and the guesses are disagreeing with each other, and for God's sakes it's September. So why is it the time for despair? Sure, Karl Rove is a genius liar, but Richard Nixon was a genius liar too, and he came to a bad end. OK, let's assume the worst. Let's assume that Four More Years becomes a reality. That would be a bad thing, yes. The rivers and the forests, they would mourn. The have-nots would mourn, guessing that they would have even less. Workers in emergency rooms and classrooms would mourn. But it is not the end of the world. You want the end of the world? Try Fallujah. I don't care which side you're on -- try Fallujah.

Did anyone hear the questions from the msm? I sure did'nt, and I am sure Kerry just followed his notes on the podium

Did anyone hear the msm questions? I sure didn't.

OK, I'm stuck at work. So, Form 180 not addressed during the p/conf. Cambodia? Any other SBVT charges raised, or only genial lap-doggery? Was anyone there from FOX?

I called it "blathering" and I have no idea what kind of word that is or even if it is one. But that's how he came across to me. I was blogging on the beheading and got stuck listening to that bastard. So I muted him but still every once in awhile Fox would put up a main point. When I saw "President Bush does not live in the land of reality!" I almost lost it. Gawd, I hate this man. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
~Cindy

Kerry's "catering"? Cool. We knew he had given up his day job.

"Take the pronoun "I" out of the English Language; John Forbes Kerry would be hard pressed to be able to speak...

SA

Posted by Sergeant America at September 21, 2004 03:29 PM "

THIS IS HYSTERICAL!!! You are so right!!!! I, I, I, I, but never how how how, what, why. Just "I"

And BARCODEKING on the Kuma Satra = bet you $5 he doesn't even know what that is??? hehehe

Cindy

OK, I think Senator Kerry is a clown, but I think that I can make sense of this mess:

Kerry-speak: "Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, ..."
Translation: Saddam was bad.

Kerry-speak: "and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president." (December 16, 2003)"
Translation: We, the United States, are at war in Iraq [because President Bush rushed into war]. However, now that we are at war, having Saddam in circulation directing the counterattacks against us is very bad. Now he can't.

Kerry-speak: "Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who deserves his own special place in hell. But that was not, in itself, a reason to go to war.[...]"
Translation: Saddam was bad. If that was the only reason that we went to war, then we did the wrong thing. [And "W" stands for "Winner" . . . No. No. Wrong. "W" stands for "Wrong."]

Kerry-speak: "I believe the invasion of Iraq has made us less secure and weaker in the war against terrorism" (September 20, 2004)"
Translation: Iraq is now a breading ground for terrorism like Afghanistan once was. [Since Afghanistan isn't completely, totally fixed then it is really a mess, and now Iraq is a mess, too.]

[Oh, my head hurts.]

However, my best guess is that this is what Kerry is trying to say. (And they say Bush can't speak clearly.)

Classic Kerry. Get out with your lives! Women and children first.....but on second thought!?

Edwiges, unless you are Victor David Hanson, you have committed plagiarism. For anyone who wants to read the entire article from which edwiges borrowed freely only to pass the commentary off as his own, go to www.nationalreview.com and read "See Ya, Iraq?". Pay particular attention to paragraph 12.

If I were a Kerry Campaign advisor, today's q & a would lead me to two conclusions: 1. Never again should Kerry do a q&a because his position on iraq cannot be explained to a normal human being and he is in danger of become a parody; and 2. be very concerned about the first debate -- and try to attack every line without saying anything more about your position than: I've made my views on that issue clear, but the President still hasn't explained [fill in the blank]. Senatory Kerry seems bright enough to recall details, but perhaps not quite bright enough to integrate principles into a coherent world view. Don't know.

And by the way -- did he say in his news conference that Saddam would have been overthrown by iraqis internally without an invasion because he didn't have wmd?

If I were a Kerry Campaign advisor, today's q & a would lead me to two conclusions: 1. Never again should Kerry do a q&a because his position on iraq cannot be explained to a normal human being and he is in danger of become a parody; and 2. be very concerned about the first debate -- and try to attack every line without saying anything more about your position than: I've made my views on that issue clear, but the President still hasn't explained [fill in the blank]. Senatory Kerry seems bright enough to recall details, but perhaps not quite bright enough to integrate principles into a coherent world view. Don't know.

And by the way -- did he say in his news conference that Saddam would have been overthrown by iraqis internally without an invasion because he didn't have wmd?

If I were a Kerry Campaign advisor, today's q & a would lead me to two conclusions: 1. Never again should Kerry do a q&a because his position on iraq cannot be explained to a normal human being and he is in danger of become a parody; and 2. be very concerned about the first debate -- and try to attack every line without saying anything more about your position than: I've made my views on that issue clear, but the President still hasn't explained [fill in the blank]. Senatory Kerry seems bright enough to recall details, but perhaps not quite bright enough to integrate principles into a coherent world view. Don't know.

And by the way -- did he say in his news conference that Saddam would have been overthrown by iraqis internally without an invasion because he didn't have wmd?

A different Rich asks:

One thing that really bothers me is that the Iraqi people themselves don’t stand up against the terrorist being the terrorist are mostly foreigners and are killing Iraqis by the dozens. Why don’t they finger them for the US troops? If they want their country in some form of stability, this would be the quickest way.

I have a contact who knows some insides on the Fallujah operation. He says they give lasers to informants. Then the safehouse gets a nice little visit from a smart bomb. There has been a lot more informants since the turnover of sovereignty. Watch the news and see how often various houses get bombed. It is almost a daily occurrence. The informants is how they do it (and with lower risk to our guys).

Uh, lasers in the hands of informants becomes problematic if the informant decides he needs a quick way to do away with the in-laws because the Mother-in Law insulted him on the last Hajj trip.

smithson_b, smithson_b, and smithson_b:
If I was Kerry's campaign manager I would jump off a very high bridge. Can you imagine what the debates are going to be like? Oh, God.

Q: What color is the sky?
Kerry: That question has been debated for ... But my opponent ... The picture is seared, SEARED in my memory."
Q: Senator. I'm sorry, your time has expired.

A different Rich:

RE: "One thing that really bothers me is that the Iraqi people themselves don’t stand up against the terrorist being the terrorist are mostly foreigners and are killing Iraqis by the dozens. Why don’t they finger them for the US troops? If they want their country in some form of stability, this would be the quickest way."
Well, one answer is that they do. In fact, the MSM won't report it, but many of the bombs appear to be meant to kill Iraqis that are volunteering to join the police or the national guard. There are a lot of Iraqis that clearly want stability for their country.

Unfortunately, many picture us as the real foreigners, particularly since we are (mostly) not members of Islam. As such, we don't count. Furthermore, they may feel that we are going to lose this thing or withdrawl, and they want to be on the winning side.

clicked over from Hugh Hewitt... It amuses me in a very morbid way how Kerry, et al, keep saying that the international "goodwill" for the USA was "squandered" after 9/11 - over and over and over...
Yet exactly WHERE was this goodwill when, less than SIX MONTHS after 9/11, this book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1592090265/qid=1095806671/sr=8-6/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i6_xgl14/102-9900251-5122503?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) was "on France’s bestseller list in its second week and became the highest-grossing book in a single week in Europe ever"? I concede that there were many "isn't it awful?" statements made in international circles during September 2001, but that "goodwill," if you can call it that, was almost unbelievably quickly converted into scorn - FAR in advance of any Iraq involvement.
France has now said incontrovertibly that they WILL NOT support any US activity in Iraq regardless of who the president may be. Where is the goodwill, again? How can Kerry still preach the mantra that he can change anything in that arena?

I only saw the last 15 minutes or so of the press conference, but what I did see was just more of the same old saw... How many times did he say he had answered every question in his speech the day before? OK, then at least tell us what you SAID in that speech instead of just saying that it answered the question! Was that just a show to tell us that he has the same position today that he did yesterday?

Also, did anyone else catch how he caught himself to keep from saying he knows about war because he was IN VIETNAM? It was pathetically obvious that he was about to say that and then modifed his statement to say he was 'involved in other similar situations.' (Not an exact quote - I didn't tape it.)

I think the only question now is "is the American electorate really stupid enough to fall for this blather?" I sure hope not.

Sorry I screwed up my trackback on this -- hopefully you can remove the previous one. I'm hoping to do some intercutting of Bush's U.N. speech with Kerry press conference comments later tonight.

There is a Senator from Mass
Who is the perfect JACKASS
Asked how he had gotten by
Simple my party taught me to LIE
Has that caused you any stress
How could it we control the press
Do you have any regrets
Hell no i'm a decorated vet
Don't you have any shame
No the right wing conspiracy is to blame