Flip-flop charge unfair
While I support Nader, not Kerry, I agree that the Republican charges of Kerry flip-flopping look to be unfair oversimplifications. After voting for initial Iraq funding, Kerry voted against additional funding because he wanted the rich ($200,000+/yr.) to pay for it. There was an interesting commentary on it in this morning’s StarTribune.
posted by Tom Cleland @ 9/08/2004 01:05:00 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
He sort of said that in his speech at the JFK library (I think I sent you the URL to the video of that):
"The dilemma with respect to Iraq and the weapons of the resolution of Saddam Hussein was-- and this is the difficulty in any vote-- you can vote "No, but"--and there are a whole lot of qualifiers-- or you can vote "Yes, but"-- and there are a lot of qualifiers, sometimes. The way people read the votes, they don’t see any of the qualifiers....."
OK, I'm a bit tired (stayed up all night), but he did mention taking some action in 1998. I guess if I am going to evolve a pro-Kerry arguement I'd better start showing his logic.
Here are some links from the Congressional Record with things Kerry has said about Iraq to show how his thoughts evolved into making his decision to vote Yes in October 2002. Hopefully they are permanent links --a lot of those Congressional links are temporary. :-(
http://thekerryfiles.blogspot.com/2004/09/some-things-kerry-has-said-about-iraq.html
Before attacking Bush’s flip-flops, Kerry’s people should first say that his positions are consistent if you don’t demagogue them. Of course, Nader is more consistent than both of them.
Post a Comment
<< Home