Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The TRUTH About John Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (715)	3/5/2004 10:05:21 AM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1483

The many, many faces of Sen. John Kerry 03/05/04 Sen. John Kerry, now the sure Democratic nominee for president, has been mocking President George W. Bush for months by saying "Bring it on" in reference to any and all debates on the issues. But Mr. Bush and his political advisers are probably thinking the same thing about Mr. Kerry. For good reason, they probably relish having an opponent with all of the Democratic nominee's weaknesses. In Mr. Kerry, the president faces a Massachusetts senator more liberal than Ted Kennedy, by a number of official rankings of the U.S. Senate. Indeed, the non-partisan National Journal just put out rankings showing that in 2003, Mr. Kerry rated as the single most liberal member of the Senate. In him, the president also faces an opponent equally as inauthentic and as arrogant as Al Gore was. Mr. Kerry is Irish-Catholic when that suits him, but he's also Jewish when that's an advantage. He has been both war hero and war protester, although he tried to have it both ways by throwing somebody else's medals over a wall in a high-profile protest, while secretly keeping his own. When it comes to fence straddling, meanwhile, the senator has been a real champion. He voted against the first war in Iraq, but then wrote the same constituent twice within nine days, once saying that he opposed the war and later saying he "strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the current crisis." He voted for the second war in Iraq, but then criticized it. He voted for the North American Free Trade Agreement, but now talks like a protectionist. To overthrow Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, the senator now says we were wrong to do it with out negotiating further at the United Nations. But when it comes to Haiti's deposed dictator, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Mr. Kerry said he would have intervened on behalf of Mr. Aristide. Not only that, but "absent an international force, I'd do it unilaterally." So it's not OK to act without U.N. approval (but with several dozen other allies) against Saddam Hussein, but it is OK to act without a single other ally to save a corrupt and brutal Haitian leader? Sen. Kerry has cast key votes to cut funds for U.S. intelligence agencies, but now criticizes the Central Intelligence Agency for weak intelligence gathering. He says he'll be stronger on national security than President Bush has been, but he has voted against the B-1 bomber, the B-2 Stealth bomber, the F-14 fighter, the F-15, the F-16, the AH-64-Apache helicopter, the Patriot missiles, the Aegis air defense cruiser (which is key to sea-based missile defense), the Trident missile for submarines, the M-1 Abrams tanks, the Tomahawk cruise missile and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. John Kerry has been both in favor of and against the death penalty for terrorists, both in favor of and against the Patriot Act, against the federal Defense of Marriage Act that President Clinton signed yet also against gay marriage, and accepting of and opposed to the "outsourcing" of jobs. Even the liberal Washington Post editorialized on Feb. 15 that Mr. Kerry has tried to have it both ways on numerous issues, and wrote that "Mr. Kerry's attempts to weave a thread connecting and justifying all these positions are unconvincing." Maybe the president shouldn't say bring him on, but to bring them on -- because there seems to be far more than just one John Kerry. al.com

To: PROLIFE who wrote (715)	3/5/2004 10:59:58 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1483

An e-mail sent to Democrats in the Middle East from the Kerry campaign was published word-for-word in the Tehran Times, and Kerry’s plan reportedly brought great joy to the fundamentalist leaders in Iran. There have been denials from the Kerry camp that the e-mail was sent to the hard-line, fundamentalist Iranian paper, but the paper's editors claim that it was sent directly to them from Senator Kerry’s campaign office. They printed it, and the frightening thing is that they didn’t have to change a word for it to serve their purpose. All the terrorists--and the states that support them--have to do is wait and hope that John Kerry wins the American presidential election and their world will stop being rocked. They fear George W. Bush with good reason. They have no reason to fear the spineless John Kerry who plans on worshipping at the altar of the U.N. and world opinion. Kerry will seek U.N. permission to protect our country and her citizens. This little-reported e-mail was perhaps the most apologetic and cowardly words ever written by a man running for the highest office in the free world. The Iranian fundamentalists waved the e-mail in the faces of their people to demonstrate that there is a powerful American that does not support their fight for democracy. In fact, this man, who may be president, will re-open a dialog with the hard-line Mullahs and ''forgive them'' for 25 years of terrorism and attacks against Americans. This message to terrorists from Kerry was front-page news all over the Middle East. It laid out how he would spend his first 100 days in office traveling the world and personally begging forgiveness for the American ''sin'' of defending herself against terrorists who are only reacting to our insufferable behavior THIS ALONE, disqualifies Kerry from being in a Leadership position in the USA. YET, why have the Media not printed it as front page headlines? Why are they covering up for him? This is all VERY DISTURBING. That email through a monkey wrench into the Iranian elections, giving the hardliners confidence to throw out over 200 Iranian electees many of whom were ALREADY in office. Anyone who thinks APOLOGEES will satisfy these radicals is a fool. Take the WTC bombings. It took YEARS to concoct, all during those YEARS Clinton was apologizing, aiding and abetting Arafat and WHAT did it get us? Two smoking tumbled towers and about 3,000 deaths of American civilians. IS THAT what this nation wants for OUR FUTURE. I ask you, WHY DOES THE MEDIA IGNORE THIS THREAT to our safety and world standing? Why!! jdn