Perhaps I'm a bit too literal minded, a real failure in the nuance department, but I have a bit of a problem with Kerry's statements of just a month ago, as related here:
boston.com
John F. Kerry for the first time yesterday said he still would have voted to give President Bush the authority to go to war in Iraq, even if he had known in October 2002 that US intelligence was flawed, that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, and that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
It seems that Mr. Kerry's statements of August 10, 2004 are completely impossible to reconcile with his position today, as shown below. In other words, Kerry has engaged in yet another volte face, as Neocon might charitably say. Less charitable folks would call this another flip-flop, smack dab in the middle of a Presidential election, no less, after being accused of too many volte faces in the past. In other words, at a time when flip-flopping should be severely restrained, not ongoing.
Please, I am in desperate need of help, semantic or otherwise. Would some charitable soul please help me make sense of this? I can't seem to do so on my own, and I would really, really like to do so.
news.myway.com|top|09-06-2004::16:06|reuters.html
CANONSBURG, Pa. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry on Monday called the invasion of Iraq "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time" and said his goal was to withdraw U.S. troops in a first White House term.
This is getting bizarre. The Kerry camp must be in tatters to allow this latest 180 to take place. |
