Kerry's Nomination Acceptance Speech

[beau]

What I didnt like about the whole DNC was how they tried to Push Kerry to the middle to gain more voters.........he really is not moderate at all...........he is very liberal. Its not just the "body armor" vote........its his whole voting record in the Senate.

The First thing Kerry would do as Pres. would be to cut Defense spending and raise taxes...........if you are for that ..........thats great, vote for him. I'm just not all about that.

 

[bunk22]

He did not sell out. He was saying that the politicians were wrong for sending them to war. He was against the war, not against his troops... There is a difference. We would be lucky to have him as the next President.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he come back and blast his bubba's for war crimes? Maybe I'm reading too much from the propaganda sites but it seems he turned his back on those still doing the fighting. In my eyes, that's being against the troops.

Serving under all 8 years of the Clinton years and looking at Senator's Kerry's voting record, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say if you value your military, your job, he may not be the best candidate for the Presidency. IMO, we will be very unlucky to him as our next President.

 

[Future Herc Driver]

Akami or anyone else thinking about voting Kerry needs to watch this. I apologize if it has been posted already.

http://media1.stream2you.com/rnc/072304v2.wmv

 

[Flash]

46,
Didn't quite understand the "multi billion dollar " comment...over my head, but Kerry voted against it with one vote against the " 87 billion " actually its 86.5 but big difference I'll take whats left over. These are quotes from two different websites...factcheck.org and issues2000.org. Bush is said to have sent the reservists w/o the best in body armor so this is how he planned on getting it to them. Kerry axed it as well as the other 86.2 billion.


Nevertheless, the bill Kerry opposed did contain $300 million requested by the Pentagon to buy best-grade body armor for all troops in Iraq, and also contained additional combat pay and health benefits for reservists called to active duty


Vote to pass a bill that would appropriate $86.5 billion in supplemental spending for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan, in Fiscal 2004. The bill would provide $10.3 billion as a grant to rebuild Iraq. This includes:
$5.1 billion for security
$5.2 billion for reconstruction costs
$65.6 billion for military operations and maintenance
$1.3 billion for veterans medical care
$10 billion as a loan that would be converted to a grant if 90% of all bilateral debt incurred by the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein, would have to be forgiven by other countries.

I hope I do not put words in 46Drivers mouth when what I think what he trying to get across is that the bill was loaded down with a lot of extraneous stuff that Kerry and others opposed. Saying that he voted just against the things you listed is not the full story.

Both sides play the same game, its called politics.

Echoing what 46Driver said some time ago, many mid level officers where I work now (the Pentagon ) have expressed displeasure at the way the administration is handling Iraq and foreign affairs in genneral. Of course, there are jsut as many who agree. I just did not expect that much variety at this level (albiet respectful and intelligent).

 

[46Driver]

I hope I do not put words in 46Drivers mouth when what I think what he trying to get across is that the bill was loaded down with a lot of extraneous stuff that Kerry and others opposed. Saying that he voted just against the things you listed is not the full story.

Both sides play the same game, its called politics.

Echoing what 46Driver said some time ago, many mid level officers where I work now (the Pentagon ) have expressed displeasure at the way the administration is handling Iraq and foreign affairs in genneral. Of course, there are jsut as many who agree. I just did not expect that much variety at this level (albiet respectful and intelligent).

You got it correct on what I was trying to say. Same thing here (European Command) concerning the cariety of opinions among mid-level officers. There was also a list of 12 high level retired flag level officers (including 2 past directors of CENTCOM and 2 Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) that came out and endorsed Kerry.

Ironic that everybody keeps bringing up the "body armor" vote, but nobody has mentioned that Kerry wants to INCREASE the military by 40,000 - the silence is deafening..... Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

 

[penderwt]

everyone should watch that video that there was a link posted to.... http://media1.stream2you.com/rnc/072304v2.wmv
i had no idea how varied kerry's positions were on iraq. i was especially stunned about what he was saying back in 1998... something about invading iraq, i don't remember the exact quote...just watch the video. enlightening.

 

[SWOdogJon]

To the War Zone, Robin!

 

[PropStop]

That's a great video. exactly expresses why i don't think he's an appropriate choice for CinC. However, i do take it with a grain of salt, you're not seeing the full interview and *sometimes* a bunch of patchwork segments can make it appear as if someone is saying something they did not actually say. By taking bits and pieces you can easily change the context of what someone says.

very interesting, never the less.

 

[BigWorm]

Exactly. Actually, Kerry has been hammering Bush over the fact the Pentagon did not have enough body armor or uparmored Humvees. And Im sure if a vote came up for a $300M supplemental for JUST body armor, it would probably get passed without a single NO vote in the House or the Senate. However, it was probably just one of thousands of items, many of them billions of dollars of pork, that was in the bill and a Kerry (or a fiscal conservative) might want to vote against the whole bill.

Here is a new twist, Fox News was commenting on an article in the New Yorker, and then I found a separate article on the net saying the same thing. http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040710-094505-4873r.htm

Basically, I found nothing saying that he voted against it because of pork. He voted against it because he needed a position against Iraq to compete with Dean in the polls. Just pure politics at it's finest.

 

[Flash]

Here is a new twist, Fox News was commenting on an article in the New Yorker, and then I found a separate article on the net saying the same thing. http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040710-094505-4873r.htm

Basically, I found nothing saying that he voted against it because of pork. He voted against it because he needed a position against Iraq to compete with Dean in the polls. Just pure politics at it's finest.

Not to burst your bubble but I don't exactly put a lot of faith in the Washington Times, it is owned by Sun Young Moon of the Moonies. The same guy who had himself crowned as the savior/messiah in a congressional office a few months ago, and I am not making that up.

 

[Cate]

As I said, I'm pretty sure Kerry's objection was over funding issues, not pork. But remember also that Bush said that he wanted the $10 million to be a grant, not a loan, and that he would veto the bill out-of-hand unless that happened. Both Kerry and Bush had their pet issues on that bill. The thing to remember is that in either case (non-passage or presidential veto), the bill wouldn't be dead - it would just go back to Congress for tweaking. So had the bill failed or Bush vetoed it, it still would have been maybe five days before it was back up for a vote again.

 

[N866DA]

I'm a USMC PLC Air applicant and I can say with certainty that I never thought my first post on this board would be on a political topic, but after many months of lurking, I'll speak up here.

I'm a registered Republican and I'm 100% behind John Kerry. Couldn't agree more with 46Driver about the deafening silence on Kerry's plans to increase the size of the armed forces by 40,000 as well as double the size of special forces.

How can anybody rightfully claim that Bush is the guy for military folks when he has cut veterans' benefits, tried to cut the "imminent danger" pay increase for servicemembers in combat zones, the list goes on....

What really gets me, though, is that he's called up thousands of reservists and national guardsmen to go over to Iraq and Afghanistan, which I'm perfectly okay with... that's part of the job. But then the administration opposed extending full benefits to those same people and their families while they were on active duty... what's up with that?

I hate to sound like a DNC commercial, really, I don't mean to, but every time I read about another Marine or soldier getting picked off by a car bomb or IED, and I think about his "Mission Accomplished" photo op, I just get more and more upset.

All that, to say nothing of his domestic record, which to say the least, is a disgrace to the ideals of fiscal conservatism and decentralization of power, which Republicans are supposed to stand for.

 

[penderwt]

gosh i don't want to beat a dead horse on this forum, but i just watched six slideshows that blew me away about john kerry...before i thought, kerry's just kinda bad, and i love W...now i really really really really hate john kerry.
www.scaryjohnkerry.com watch these slideshows. the 'it's nice to be john f. kerry' one isn't all that useful, but i all the other ones had facts that really rocked me. check it out. and lets talk about these videos. they're undoubtedly a heavy conservative slant. so don't come on and just say, "they presented a case against john kerry, that's it." duh...it's one side of the story..but i believe it's the side the media is short-changing...

fire it up baby....

 

[Future Herc Driver]

About Kerry saying hes going to add 40,000 troops. How do you know hes not going to change his mind tomorrow.He will vote for the troops, but vote against paying them. Sorry, but I cant believe a word that comes out of that guys mouth.

 

[El Cid]

About the 40K jobs... here's a deafening blow to your little theory. Kerry wants to add 40K jobs by cutting EVERY military members pay. Not cutting by reducing our current pay but by reducing the cost of living adjustments. I don't know about you but telling an E-2 that he will just have to get by next year on the same amount of pay with constantly rising inflation rates is wrong. He also wants to cut the military's budget... so we'll add 40K jobs + cut cost of living adjustments + cut the military's budget = decreased readiness + disgruntled service members.

How's that for bursting your silence? 46driver, N866DA?