Kerry's Plan For The Troops

[bobbcat]

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

Exerpts:

As president, I will never send troops into battle without the right equipment or a plan to win the peace.

Really? Then why did you vote against that funding for the troops, after voting in favor of the invasion in the first place?

I will bring back our nation's time-honored tradition: The United States never goes to war because we want to. We only go to war because we have to.

You voted to support the invasion, Mr. Kerry. Did you forget that?

Lead NATO to make the security of Iraq one of its global missions and to deploy a significant portion of the force needed to secure and win the peace there. NATO participation will open the door to greater international involvement from non-NATO countries.

Oh really? NATO is mere putty in your hands to be lead around by the nose, Mr. Kerry? Guess again on that one. Bush worked very hard with the European allies and others. France and Germany were the main ones that didn't get involved. Germany is quite pacifist, and France was firmly ensconced in the UN's corrupt oil-for-food program. Don't want to bite the hand that feeds ya, afterall.

Internationalize the reconstruction efforts in Iraq to end the continuing perception of a U.S. occupation and help coordinate the rebuilding.

Hmmmmmmmmm. I smell a thinly shrouded plan to turn our troops over to the UN to handle. Bad idea there.

People should think long and hard before deciding to help put this joke of a politician at the helm of the WH.

[Twinplets]

Originally Posted by bobbcat

You voted to support the invasion, Mr. Kerry. Did you forget that?

Kerry voted for something? Oh, right, that was before the big campaigning season. As much as I'm against Bush, I might vote against Kerry just for such dereliction of duty in missng just about every single vote in the past several months (or more). Having Kerry and Ted Kennedy for our senators isn't one of my favorite things about living in Massachusetts.

[CagedTroll]

Originally Posted by bobbcat

Really? Then why did you vote against that funding for the troops, after voting in favor of the invasion in the first place?

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] Bush promised to veto the $87 billion if it resulted in a tax increase on people earning more than $200,000 a year. And Bush didn't send them over with the equipment they needed in the first place. And what Kerry voted against (the $87 billion) was only barely about the troops. Unfortunately, three points makes for a bad soundbite, so we the informed electorate are forced to play "connect-the-dots".

Originally Posted by Twinplets

As much as I'm against Bush, I might vote against Kerry just for such dereliction of duty in missng just about every single vote in the past several months (or more).

You might also want to look at how much time then-GOVERNOR Bush spent in Texas in 2000, cause he was out-of-state for most of that year. And also, look at how [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now], and suddenly the GOP shelved the vote on a bill they were pushing, just so Frist could get in a soundbite about how Kerry's been busy campaigning...

[Twinplets]

Originally Posted by CagedTrollAnd also, look at how [URL=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61940-2004Jun22.html

Kerry made it a point to be there when it was thought he'd need to be there[/URL], and suddenly the GOP shelved the vote on a bill they were pushing, just so Frist could get in a soundbite about how Kerry's been busy campaigning...

Exceprt from CT's quote:
Presidential candidates often ignore their elected duties to pursue higher office, which can become a campaign issue. Sen. Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.) quit the Senate in 1996 when his campaign schedule became overwhelming. Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) was rarely seen in the House during his recent run for the presidential nomination. Kerry's absence last week during a vote on an unemployment insurance benefits bill prompted Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) to call on Kerry to quit his Senate seat.

The vote that cost Massachusetts $75 million in federal funduing for unemployment benefits. Although while searching to find out the details, I found a link [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] that said that the vote was destined to fail by a dozen votes, but some Republicans voted for it so it's be close enough that it would look like Kerry was the the reason it failed. My opinion of the Boston Herald isn't all that high, so I'm wary of believing it, but I'll post it just to present another side, right or wrong.