Jump to content

How's that again, Senator?


Recommended Posts

Boston Herald

It was a classic John Kerry moment.

There he was front and center, his traveling band of Vietnam vet crewmates arrayed behind him, he lit into George Bush for his conduct of the Iraq war and for sending in troops so ill-equipped that their families were taking up collections to send them body armor.

It was pretty emotional stuff. He charged that on the date President Bush decided to go into Iraq, the military "didn't have the armament on the Humvees, the armored doors. They didn't have the equipment they needed. . .and they didn't have the state-of-the-art body armor.''

A new Bush campaign ad charges, quite rightly, that Kerry voted against the special $87 billion appropriation which included money for body armor along with pay raises for those in the military and expanded health care benefits for National Guardsmen and reservists called up in during the war.

Asked about that charge and how it squares with his comments this week, the Massachusetts senator slipped into Kerry-speak:

]"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it[/u],'' he said.

If that isn't enough to convince voters that Kerry is talking out of both sides of his mouth, we can't imagine what is.

In his continuing effort to be all things to all voters - for the Iraq war and against it; for providing support to the military and against it; for providing for an adequate defense and against it - John Kerry is engaging in a level of doublespeak that makes most voters wince.

Kerry now insists he would have voted for the body armor and the pay raises and the medical benefits if a portion of the Bush tax cuts had been repealed to pay for it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it,'' he said.

You have got to be kidding me. This guy is hysterical. :lol:

It is a classic!! Dick Cheney was hammering him on it last night.

This is the quote that stuck out with me though. Maybe some of our liberals can help me understand Kerry's logic here.

Kerry now insists he would have voted for the body armor and the pay raises and the medical benefits if a portion of the Bush tax cuts had been repealed to pay for it all.

Up until now, Kerry has accused the Bush administration of sending the military to war without sufficient armor, among other supplies and equipment, to get the job done.

What I read in the quote above is it's not Bush that is at fault, but rather Kerry's politics that have caused this supposed shortage of equipment. From where I sit, it looks like Mr Kerry shot himself in the foot again. He was so opposed to the tax cuts that he was willing to sacrifice the safety of the troops to get his point across.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...