10 reasons why I won't vote for Kerry...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Hugenstein

Senior member
Dec 30, 2000
419
0
0
Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


So basically we can look at this two ways.

1. A well regulated Militia is no longer necessary for the security of a free State--so the government can infringe on the right to bear arms all it wants.

2. A well regulated Militia is still necessary for the security of a free State--so owning a gun makes you part of the "well regulated" Militia. What did I just put in quotes there...."well regulated", what could "well regulated" possibly mean...hmmm...that's right the government may not be able to infringe on your right to bear arms, but they can sure as hell regulate it. The government is perfectly within its rights under the second ammendment to make you take gun classes, force you to get a concealed weapons permit, prevent felons from owning guns, limit the type of guns you can own, etc......

There is nothing I hate more than people who spout off 2nd Ammendment, without actually reading it. I guess that is why the supreme court doesn't overturn gun laws, they have actually read and interpreted the 2nd Ammendment.


Pretty much everything on this top ten list is completely worthless without an explanation.

1. Against the death penalty in almost all cases. -What does that mean "in almost all cases." This sounds very familiar like it came straight out of an ad from the Republican party. Anyway this is a pretty small issue in the scope of things and it is left to the states to decide on the death penalty, so the president's opinion on the issue really doesn't matter unless he has made it a cornerstone of his campaign to get enough supreme court justices to overturn the death penalty. He hasn't to my knowledge, this issue has nothing to do with the presidential election.

2. Voted many times against tax cuts. - This is a completely worthless statement. Give me a list of what specific bills he voted against and why that was wrong. Simply voting against tax cuts doesn't make the vote wrong.


3. Supported killing military programs, including the B-1 and B-2 bombers. - This is my favorite one, exactly what bill did he vote against that killed these programs. What other parts of the bill were there. Was there anything ridicilous about the bill, say for instance giving more money to the military than they asked for.


4. Voted against banning "partial-birth" abortions and against parental notification when minors have abortions. -Was this one bill or more than one. Perhaps there was an issue with one portion of the bill, that he disagreed with, for instance an outright ban on "partial-birth" abortions even in cases where the life of the mother was in danger.


5. Voted against Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states to refuse to recognize gay marriages in other states. - This is a states issue, I don't see why congress is dealing with this. Either way discrminating against people is not something we are supposed to do here. We may have left sexaulity of the sex, race, and creed discrimination list, but its pretty hypocritical to start the discrimination now. Besides which If one state doesn't recognize another state's gay marriage there will be a whole ball of issues that come with that, like if a member of a gay marriage is injured in a state that doesn't support gay marriage is he still covered under his partner's health insurance that would cover him if he was injured in his "home" state, etc.

6. Voted against the 1991 Gulf War. - Which bill did he specifically vote against. Were there changes to the bill which was later voted for by Kerry. What were the changes?

7. Voted against $87 billion to support U.S. troops and rebuild Iraq. - Why did he do this, did he later change his vote after the issues he has were worked out?

8. Called for taxing guns and ammunition to pay for anti-crime programs. -taxes should come from related areas, gas taxes should pay for roads, etc.

9. Pushed to cut CIA funding - then griped about poor intelligence after 9/11. - When did he do this, what speeches, what votes, etc.

10. Supported furloughs for first-degree murderers. - Again, when did he do this, and if so why did he do this.

If you want to convince me of something, you are going to have to make a reasonable, well thought out argument that is backed up by facts.

Oh and by the way Al Gore did "invent the Internet" as the Republicans would say, or "During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet. " as Al Gore actually said. Do a little research about what Al Gore actually did, he actually did some pretty important things to get it out of the government's hand and into the public's. Now that it doesn't matter to a presidential election maybe some Republicans will be more willing to accept the truth.
 

XZeroII

Lifer
Jun 30, 2001
12,572
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool

So what are you b!tching about then? If he is "Against the death penalty in almost all cases," and like you said death penalty is not used in almost all cases.

I was saying that his statistics that he mentioned are most likely not very accurate.
He claimed that the death penalty is not an effective deterrant, but I claim that those statistics are misleading. Look in China where drug use is punishable by death. Basically, if you are caught with drugs on Friday, you are dead on saturday. Guess how much drug use there is in China. Not much. I think this shows the effectivness of capital punishment. Now, I don't believe that we should kill everyone who breaks a law, but I believe that it is a big deterrant when properly used. As it stands in the US, the death penalty is not properly used. If you commit a 1st degree murder, the odds of you actually being killed by the state is very minimal. I think that is why it is not a deterrant in the US, because the odds of you being killed by the state are so low.

Just my oppinion, but it makes a lot of sense.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Bush screwing the pooch by averting our resources in the war against Terrorism by execuring his ill conceived War in Iraq is reason enough not to vote that fumble toungued disaster of a President from Crawford Texas. Count on us shelling out billions of dollars and losing multitudes of Amercan Servicemen for the next ten to twenty years over in that Sh!thole of a country. Unfortunately a fitting legacy for such an incompetent President
 

XZeroII

Lifer
Jun 30, 2001
12,572
0
0
Originally posted by: chess9
XZeroII:

We have no clue how much drug use China has. It's a totalitarian regime, remember? They don't publish drug use statistics at www.CommieChina.com.

-Robert

By George, you're right! CommieChina.com is just a p0rn site for chimps!
 

rickn

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
7,064
0
0
Originally posted by: Quixfire
New York Post | January 29, 2004

1. Against the death penalty in almost all cases.
2. Voted many times against tax cuts.
3. Supported killing military programs, including the B-1 and B-2 bombers.
4. Voted against banning "partial-birth" abortions and against parental notification when minors have abortions.
5. Voted against Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states to refuse to recognize gay marriages in other states.
6. Voted against the 1991 Gulf War.
7. Voted against $87 billion to support U.S. troops and rebuild Iraq.
8. Called for taxing guns and ammunition to pay for anti-crime programs.
9. Pushed to cut CIA funding - then griped about poor intelligence after 9/11.
10. Supported furloughs for first-degree murderers.


if you were just an everyday average joe withouit the internet to look up all that stuff, you wouldn't know 90% of it.

I only have one reason why I will vote for him.

1. His last name aint Bush
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
There is nothing I hate more than people who spout off 2nd Ammendment, without actually reading it. I guess that is why the supreme court doesn't overturn gun laws, they have actually read and interpreted the 2nd Ammendment.
that assumes the issue has ever come before the supreme court.

it hasn't.


8. Called for taxing guns and ammunition to pay for anti-crime programs. -taxes should come from related areas, gas taxes should pay for roads, etc.
since the people buying gas are 99.9999% using those roads, i'd agree. people buying guns and using them in crime aren't buying them from people who'd be collecting taxes anyway. people selling stolen weapons and illegally simply won't collect taxes. the burden would be on lawful users, so you're gouging a completely different set of people than those you're trying to gouge. that fails due process.
 

leeboy

Banned
Dec 8, 2003
451
0
0
Originally posted by: DoubleL
My father was a LRP (long range patrol) ranger paratrooper (51st Infintry, F division) in Vietnam and hates the fact that soldiers are dying in Iraq right now for no good reason.


Your father was a good man, I hate the fact that soldiers are dying in Iraq to but I don't think they are dying for no good reason,

rolleye.gif
 

Hugenstein

Senior member
Dec 30, 2000
419
0
0
Actually the Supreme Court upheld a federal law prohibiting the interstate transport of sawed off shotguns in 1939.

On numerous occassions the Supreme Court has refused to hear cases that related to the constitutionality of laws banning certain types of weapons. I guess its up to you to decide if they did that because they no the outcome won't change, they wanted to avoid joining in on a political issue, or they have better cases to hear.

 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Bush screwing the pooch by averting our resources in the war against Terrorism by execuring his ill conceived War in Iraq is reason enough not to vote that fumble toungued disaster of a President from Crawford Texas.
:beer:


Count on us shelling out billions of dollars and losing multitudes of Amercan Servicemen for the next ten to twenty years over in that Sh!thole of a country. Unfortunately a fitting legacy for such an incompetent President
:disgust:
 

Quixfire

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2001
6,892
0
0
Originally posted by: rickn
Originally posted by: Quixfire
New York Post | January 29, 2004

1. Against the death penalty in almost all cases.
2. Voted many times against tax cuts.
3. Supported killing military programs, including the B-1 and B-2 bombers.
4. Voted against banning "partial-birth" abortions and against parental notification when minors have abortions.
5. Voted against Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states to refuse to recognize gay marriages in other states.
6. Voted against the 1991 Gulf War.
7. Voted against $87 billion to support U.S. troops and rebuild Iraq.
8. Called for taxing guns and ammunition to pay for anti-crime programs.
9. Pushed to cut CIA funding - then griped about poor intelligence after 9/11.
10. Supported furloughs for first-degree murderers.


if you were just an everyday average joe withouit the internet to look up all that stuff, you wouldn't know 90% of it.

I only have one reason why I will vote for him.

1. His last name aint Bush
Incorrect, I listen to talk radio not the BS the liberal media spoons out the average american.

I listen to NPR in the morning, Bob Duco in the afternoon, NPR again in the evening, and then I watch Fox News for about an hour before reading.


 

rickn

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
7,064
0
0
music is better for ya. everything else is just so damn depressing. who needs it.
 

Odoacer

Senior member
Jun 30, 2001
809
0
0
Originally posted by: Hugenstein


Pretty much everything on this top ten list is completely worthless without an explanation.

1. Against the death penalty in almost all cases. -What does that mean "in almost all cases." This sounds very familiar like it came straight out of an ad from the Republican party. Anyway this is a pretty small issue in the scope of things and it is left to the states to decide on the death penalty, so the president's opinion on the issue really doesn't matter unless he has made it a cornerstone of his campaign to get enough supreme court justices to overturn the death penalty. He hasn't to my knowledge, this issue has nothing to do with the presidential election.

2. Voted many times against tax cuts. - This is a completely worthless statement. Give me a list of what specific bills he voted against and why that was wrong. Simply voting against tax cuts doesn't make the vote wrong.


3. Supported killing military programs, including the B-1 and B-2 bombers. - This is my favorite one, exactly what bill did he vote against that killed these programs. What other parts of the bill were there. Was there anything ridicilous about the bill, say for instance giving more money to the military than they asked for.


4. Voted against banning "partial-birth" abortions and against parental notification when minors have abortions. -Was this one bill or more than one. Perhaps there was an issue with one portion of the bill, that he disagreed with, for instance an outright ban on "partial-birth" abortions even in cases where the life of the mother was in danger.


5. Voted against Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states to refuse to recognize gay marriages in other states. - This is a states issue, I don't see why congress is dealing with this. Either way discrminating against people is not something we are supposed to do here. We may have left sexaulity of the sex, race, and creed discrimination list, but its pretty hypocritical to start the discrimination now. Besides which If one state doesn't recognize another state's gay marriage there will be a whole ball of issues that come with that, like if a member of a gay marriage is injured in a state that doesn't support gay marriage is he still covered under his partner's health insurance that would cover him if he was injured in his "home" state, etc.

6. Voted against the 1991 Gulf War. - Which bill did he specifically vote against. Were there changes to the bill which was later voted for by Kerry. What were the changes?

7. Voted against $87 billion to support U.S. troops and rebuild Iraq. - Why did he do this, did he later change his vote after the issues he has were worked out?

8. Called for taxing guns and ammunition to pay for anti-crime programs. -taxes should come from related areas, gas taxes should pay for roads, etc.

9. Pushed to cut CIA funding - then griped about poor intelligence after 9/11. - When did he do this, what speeches, what votes, etc.

10. Supported furloughs for first-degree murderers. - Again, when did he do this, and if so why did he do this.

If you want to convince me of something, you are going to have to make a reasonable, well thought out argument that is backed up by facts.

Oh and by the way Al Gore did "invent the Internet" as the Republicans would say, or "During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet. " as Al Gore actually said. Do a little research about what Al Gore actually did, he actually did some pretty important things to get it out of the government's hand and into the public's. Now that it doesn't matter to a presidential election maybe some Republicans will be more willing to accept the truth.

You may accuse the list of not being specific enough, but I accuse you of nitpicking. You're just inviting ridicule by your "show me the bill" rhetoric. No, it's not a thorough dossier on Kerry's policies, but it's not a broad generalization either. What the list does provide is a trend in voting - against the death penalty in almost all cases, voted many times against tax cuts, and so on. What this indicates is a clear bias, especially on such polarizing topics.

Regarding #3 (Defense bills), your "favorite one" - Well, that happens to be an interest of mine too. Google+"John F. Kerry Defense Bills"+'i'm feeling lucky' button = this. The article even names a few bills, so I hope you're satisfied.

Even though it's fairly obvious who the author of the article will be voting for, one thing that he does point out is that Kerry has a very inconsistent record with Defensematters - and it seems, Kerry has been against Defense more than for it. (Interesting stance for a Vietnam hero, IMHO). As a matter of fact, the article says very explicitly that Kerry voted against a package deal for introducing virtually our ENTIRE current-generation military hardware: the M1 Abrams, F-14 Tomahawks, F-15 Eagles, F-16 Falcons, Patriot SAMs, Tomahawk cruise missiles, AH-64 Apaches. All of those weapons system are INDISPENSABLE to our armed forces today - all are seeing extensive action in Iraq to this day, and America wouldn't have the power it has today without these. Really, it frightens me to think that an aspiring President would have been willing to let us face the threats of the new century with rusting, antiquated Vietnam-era equipment. (Nostalgia, perhaps?)

#7 and #9 are particularly disturbing to me. Would he have chosen to leave our troops hanging in Iraq with insufficient resources, or enact a premature withdrawl that would have plunged the country even deeper into chaos? Whether or not he supported the war in the first place is irrelevant; our troops are in Baghdad now (and coming under fire) so it's imperative that we give them all the support we can.

About CIA funding: Cutting money is one thing, but not acknowledging that his own cuts could have led to a even greater disaster on 9/11 lends ammuniton to us Republicans sick and tired of hearing Democrats bash "Bush's hypocrisy." Terrorism was a real and present danger even before 9/11 (Beirut, Kenya/Tanzania and the USS Cole, anyone?). Cutting money from services to track terrorists is just folly.

There's only one issue (#5) that I think really is gonna boil down to the voter's personal preference. Personally, I'm for Defense of Marriage, but that's just me. That's a discussion for next time :)

Okay, whew. *steps down from soapbox*
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
Wasn't the "cut" to the CIA actually a refund of money that was appropriated to them but never actually used? Or am I confusing this with a different bill?

Also, the B2 is a useless plane for today. I mean, what do we need a B2 for when our main enemies are hiding in caves?
 

Odoacer

Senior member
Jun 30, 2001
809
0
0
Originally posted by: Strk
Wasn't the "cut" to the CIA actually a refund of money that was appropriated to them but never actually used? Or am I confusing this with a different bill?

Also, the B2 is a useless plane for today. I mean, what do we need a B2 for when our main enemies are hiding in caves?

I'm unfamiliar with the CIA cuts actually, I'll look more into that. I still don't think it's wise to take money away from them though, not at this point in history.

I agree, there's not much reason to be spending $2B per plane today... but when it was designed during the cold war, there was definitely a need. When we bombed Iraq, Stealth planes were often use to strike downtown Baghdad and various other sites with heavy AAA. They have a niche, but I think the current fleet is large enough for most intents and purposes. The B-1 has some other radar-evading features too if I'm not mistaken...
 

Spamela

Diamond Member
Oct 30, 2000
3,859
0
76
Originally posted by: chess9
Spamela:

Those are some serious deads. :)

My training partner is Dominick Castellano, former World Powerlifting Champion. He squatted something like 810 pounds. :)

I don't remember how much his dead lift was, but it was mind-boggling. :)

I'm a wuss compared to you guys....

-Robert

thanks.

"wuss?" - depends on how much you weigh, your age, exercise history, and goals.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
he's not bush, thats good enough for anyone with scrupples. ah the lies of republicans. like if u originally supported liebermans homeland security plan, and then rejected the republicans bloated version, they call u against homeland defense. u see, thats why they tell u to swear to tell THE WHOLE TRUTH in court, not just the truth.


all you really neeed? Bob Woodward's Bush at War, Bush himself admitted Osama Bin Laden wasn't a priority before Sept. 11. "I was not on point," Bush said. "I have no hesitancy about going after him. But I didn't feel that sense of urgency, and my blood was not nearly as boiling." which he so desperately lies about now that clarke and others have revealed he did this in the face of evidence, and pissed away the mommentum on the issue from the previous admin to focus on his cold war objectives.

Did Kerry Oppose Tanks & Planes? Not Lately

Kerry voted often against nuclear missiles and bombers in the '90s, but GOP claims that he opposed a long list of conventional weapons are overblown.

February 26, 2004

Modified: February 26, 2004



Bush?s campaign chairman Marc Racicot on Feb. 22 accused Kerry of ?voting against the weapons systems that are winning the War on Terror? and says Kerry was for "canceling or cutting funding for the B-2 Stealth Bomber, the B-1B, the F-15, the F-16, the M1 Abrams, the Patriot Missile, the AH-64 Apache Helicopter, the Tomahawk Cruise Missile, and the Aegis Air-Defense Cruiser." Another Bush campaign spokesman said Kerry has a "32-year history of voting to cut defense programs and cut defense systems" (a clear impossibility since Kerry has been in office less than 20 years.)

It's true Kerry expressed opposition to those weapons 20 years ago as a candidate, voted against Pentagon budgets several times as a senator in the early and mid-1990's, and proposed cuts in military and intelligence budgets as deficit-reduction measures as recently as 1996.

But Kerry's votes against specific military hardware were mostly against strategic nuclear weapons including the B-2 bomber, Trident missile and anti-missile items, not against conventional equipment such as tanks. And Kerry has a point when he says ?I've voted for some of the largest defense and intelligence budgets in our history,? which is correct. He's voted for military spending bills regularly since 1997.
Analysis



Twenty years ago, as a candidate battling another liberal for the Democratic nomination for the Senate in Massachusetts Kerry advocated terminating many strategic and tactical weapons.

In this 1984 campaign memo (which a Kerry spokesman confirms is genuine) the candidate called for cutting Ronald Reagan?s military budget by between $45 billion and $53 billion through (among other things) cancellation of the MX missile, B-1 bomber, anti-satellite weapons, and the ?Star Wars? anti-missile program, along with several conventional weapons that have become mainstays of the present-day military, including the AH-64 Apache helicopter, the Aegis air-defense cruiser, and the F-14 and F-15 fighters. He also called for a 50% reduction in the Tomahawk cruise missile.

And during the same campaign, according to the Boston Globe, Kerry also advocated reductions in the M-1 Abrams tank, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and the F-16 jet.

"No Excuse"

"There's no excuse for casting even one vote for unnecessary weapons of destruction, and as your senator I will never do so," Kerry said in the memo.

In 1985, Kerry's first speech in the Senate was against President Reagan's proposal to build MX ballistic missiles, and also in 1985 he introduced a "nuclear freeze" resolution calling on the President to negotiate a "verifiable" halt to testing, production and deployment of nuclear weapons. It attracted no co-sponsors and died without a hearing in committee.

Throughout Kerry's early Senate years he often voted against specific weapons systems and sometimes against the entire Pentagon budget. He voted repeatedly to cancel the B-2 Stealth bomber, for example, in 1989 , 1991 (twice ) and 1992 . He voted against the Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missile in 1994 and 1995. And he voted repeatedly to cut funds for the Strategic Defense Initiative (ballistic missile defense) in 1991, 1992, 1993 , 1995, and 1996. He also voted for across-the-board cuts in the military budget in 1991 and 1992, as Congress struggled to deal with mounting federal deficits and the former Soviet Union disintegrated.

Republicans shouldn't make too much of these votes, however, since President Bush's own father announced in his 1992 State of the Union address that he would be ceasing further production of B-2 bombers and MX missiles, and would cut military spending by 30 percent over several years.

Voting Against M-1 Tanks? Not Really.

And Republicans go too far when they claim that Kerry voted against such mainstay weapons of today's military as the M-1 Abrams tank, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, and the Patriot missile. (See this Republican National Committee "fact sheet," for example.) These claims are misleading because they rest on Kerry's votes against the entire Pentagon appropriations bills in 1990 and 1995. Kerry also voted against the Pentagon authorization bills (which provide authority to spend but not the actual money) in those years and also in 1996. But none of those were votes against specific weapons systems. Kerry's critics might just as well say he was voting to fire the entire Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps.

It is true as Republicans say that in 1993 (Bill Clinton's first year as President) Kerry specifically proposed cutting the size of the military, including reductions in numbers of submarines, jet fighters and soldiers. But what Republicans fail to mention is that it was a very broad measure aimed at cutting federal spending by $85 billion at a time when the federal deficit was roughly $300 billion. Kerry's measure -- the "Budget Deficit Reduction Act of 1993" -- targeted not only military spending but also would have eliminated federal subsidies for cotton, wool and mohair production, eliminated the superconducting super collider and the space station, and raised fees for grazing or mining on public land. That bill died without a hearing in the Senate Finance Committee.

It is also true that Kerry proposed in 1995 another measure that -- among other things -- would have cut the US intelligence budget by $300 million per year for 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000. Republicans fail to mention, however, that this was another broad, deficit-reduction measure that didn't just target military spending. When he introduced it Sept. 29, 1995, Kerry said it would cut $90 billion in federal spending, of which $10 billion would come from defense spending, and $11 billion from terminating the international space station program.

Republicans also point to a 1996 bill Kerry introduced to cut $6.5 billion from defense spending. What Kerry's critics fail to mention is that Kerry proposed to use the money to hire an additional 100,000 police officers (above the 100,000 President Clinton already was proposing to fund.) Kerry called it the Safer Streets Act of 1996.

Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, in a telephone conference call with reporters arranged by the Bush campaign Feb 21, went way over the top when he accused Kerry of "a 32-year history of voting to cut defense programs and cut defense systems." That's not possible since Kerry's first vote was cast in 1985. It also implies that Kerry has continued to vote for cuts over his entire career, which isn't true.

A "New Kerry?"

Since 1996, the John Kerry who once opposed the Apache helicopter and wanted to cut Tomahawk cruise-missile funds by 50% has evolved into a steady supporter of military budgets. Starting in 1997 Kerry voted for every regular Department of Defense appropriations bill and for every authorization bill as well.

Kerry says he's changed. He still defends his opposition to the MX missile and the "Star Wars" strategic defense initiative, but concedes that opposing some other weapons was a mistake.

This was not in evidence Feb. 21, when Kerry lashed out at the Bush campaign's criticism of his voting record. In a letter to President Bush he said -- wrongly -- "you and your campaign have initiated a widespread attack on my service in Vietnam," which is not the case. In fact Bush spokesmen at the White House, the campaign and the Republican National Committee have gone out of their way repeatedly to distinguish between Kerry's military service, which they call honorable, and his legislative record.

But Kerry was less defensive and more candid in a June, 2003 interview with Boston Globe reporter Brian Mooney. The reporter quoted Kerry as conceding that some of his positions 20 years earlier were "ill-advised, and I think some of them are stupid in the context of the world we find ourselves in right now and the things that I've learned since then. . . . I mean, you learn as you go in life."

The Globe quoted Kerry as saying his subsequent Senate voting record on defense has been "pretty responsible."
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=147



and more here on cheney himself bragging about heavy defence cuts:p http://slate.msn.com/id/2096127/

hey should also have looked up some testimony by Dick Cheney, the first President Bush's secretary of defense (and now vice president), three days later, boasting of similar slashings before the Senate Armed Services Committee:

Overall, since I've been Secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That's the peace dividend. ? And now we're adding to that another $50 billion ? of so-called peace dividend.

Cheney proceeded to lay into the then-Democratically controlled Congress for refusing to cut more weapons systems.

Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. ? You've directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s, and F-16s?all great systems ? but we have enough of them.




and more from http://www.fair.org/press-releases/kerry-military-votes.html
 

Kwatt

Golden Member
Jan 3, 2000
1,602
12
81
<snip>
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Kerry says he's changed. He still defends his opposition to the MX missile and the "Star Wars" strategic defense initiative, but concedes that opposing some other weapons was a mistake.
<snip>




A politician who admits he made mistake.... I am going to need a double shot of tequila and a couple of jolts from a defibrillator on that.


On second thought I am sure he meant to say "I received poor intelligence reports and it is not my fault". And "That's my story and I am sticking to it"



Kwatt

 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Originally posted by: ianbergman
10 reasons I'll vote for Kerry:
4. Being a minor shouldn't take away a woman (girl's) right to choose what's best for her.

Possibly the stupidest thing I have read here to date, so you are saying at 12, 13, 14, 15..etc you knew exactly what was best for you and never valued the input from your parents? sorry but bzzzzt that is wrongo...I know if I had a CHILD that was contemplating abortion I would hope to hell a doctor called me on the phone and let me know what was going on if my child was unwilling to be open and honest.
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: Quixfire
New York Post | January 29, 2004

1. Against the death penalty in almost all cases. Doesn't matter to me.
2. Voted many times against tax cuts. At this point, this doesn't matter.
3. Supported killing military programs, including the B-1 and B-2 bombers. Given Kerry, I'm sure he has his reasons.
4. Voted against banning "partial-birth" abortions and against parental notification when minors have abortions. I agree with this (i.e. I agree with you)
5. Voted against Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states to refuse to recognize gay marriages in other states. I disagree with this.
6. Voted against the 1991 Gulf War. Undecided.
7. Voted against $87 billion to support U.S. troops and rebuild Iraq. I disagree.
8. Called for taxing guns and ammunition to pay for anti-crime programs. Mmm... debateable.
9. Pushed to cut CIA funding - then griped about poor intelligence after 9/11. ... I'd have to see more information.
10. Supported furloughs for first-degree murderers. Link?