The More Kerry Changes, the More He Stays the Same

[Flatrater]

The More Kerry Changes, the More He Stays the SameBy Ann Coulter
FrontPageMagazine.com | September 9, 2004

There's been a lot of weeping and gnashing of teeth among the Democrats since Vice President Cheney said if the country makes the wrong choice on Election Day, "then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States." (I mean there is weeping among Democrats who aren't actually rooting for us to get hit again because "we deserve it!") I believe this is one of those "issues" Democrats claim to be champing at the bit to discuss – in lieu of discussing the charges of the Swift Boat veterans. In fact, there is no more important issue in this election: Which candidate will best protect America from terrorist attack? Hint: It's not the guy whose running mate (sounding so much like Sean Hayes from "Will and Grace" it was eerie) said their message to the terrorists was: "We will destroy youuuuuuu!"Of course, it gets complicated trying to do a side-by-side comparison of the candidates' positions on terrorism since we don't know which John Kerry is running for president. The one who opposes war with Iraq or the one who supports it? The one who opposes the Patriot Act or the one who voted for it? The one who wants to work with the allies, or the one who ridicules them when they support America? The only way Kerry's constantly changing positions on little matters like war would seem rational is if we found out he was using a Ouija board to determine his positions – much as he's using a crystal ball to predict when we should start removing U.S. troops from Iraq. Six months – whoops, no, four years. Stupid crystal balls – they never work! Republicans have been having raucous fun trying to predict what Kerry's next policy shift will be. Education? AIDS? Pollution? Dang! He picked women's rights! OK, here's another dollar. Give me three more balls, please. While waiting for the Ouija board to give us Kerry's final answer on the Iraq war, perhaps we could get an answer on something simpler – like whether or not Kerry owns an SUV. During the Democratic primaries, Kerry went to Michigan and bragged to the Detroit News: "We have some SUVs. We have a Jeep. We have a couple of Chrysler minivans. We have a PT Cruiser up in Boston. I have an old Dodge 600 that I keep in the Senate. ... We also have a Chevy, a big Suburban." He was starting to sound like a used-car dealer in a giant cowboy hat peddling his wares in a cheesy, low-budget late-night TV commercial: "We got Jeeps, we got PT Cruisers, we got minivans, and they're priced to move, folks ..." But a few months after Kerry won the Michigan primary in February, the feckless opportunist told a bunch of environmentalists: "I don't own an SUV." When pressed on the apparent contradiction, Kerry explained: "The family has it. I don't have it." We're still waiting for reaction from some group calling themselves "SUV Owners for the Truth." As I recall, when it came to funding his campaign last January with a $6 million mortgage on the "family" home in Boston – owned by Kerry's billionaire wife – he was not so picky about what he owns and what she owns. Back then, Kerry had somewhat more liberal views on the notion of "community property" – or maybe that was just the pre-nup talking. The "family" angle could also explain Kerry's positions on the wall in Israel: His wife supports it and he opposes it! Speaking to an Arab group in Michigan in October 2003, Kerry called Israel's erection of a wall between Israeli and Palestinian areas "another barrier to peace." But a few months later, Kerry got on the fence on the subject of the wall. Adding clarity to the subject, his campaign issued a memo in February, saying Kerry took the precise opposite position of his earlier position. The memo said: "John Kerry supports the construction of Israel's security fence to stop terrorists from entering Israel. The security fence is a legitimate act of self-defense ..." So the wall was either (1) a barrier to peace or (2) a legitimate act of self-defense. The campaign then said Kerry had meant to say the real barrier to peace was Pink Floyd's "The Wall." While Kerry works out his positions, apparently the voters have decided that their legitimate act of self-defense is to vote for Bush.

[Cbass]

Ann Coulter is about as honest and unbiased a source of information as Michael Moore. About as intelligent as well.

[taranaki]

Well given that Kerry has all these dreadful failings, it says a hell of a lot about the other guy that Kerry is even in the running, let alone overtaking him in the polls.

[YogsVR4]

Originally Posted by taranaki

Well given that Kerry has all these dreadful failings, it says a hell of a lot about the other guy that Kerry is even in the running, let alone overtaking him in the polls.

You must be looking at poll in New Zealand http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm


However, you are right about Kerry's dreadful failings. They are numerous and they are awful.

The other guy has a bad record on spending and immigration. Of course Kerry hasn't spelled out his platform for immigration, but has suggested 2 trillion more in spending over what Bush has proposed.


Kerry has no conviction other then to take the money out of the people who actually work.













Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

[dbebesi]

Originally Posted by taranaki

Well given that Kerry has all these dreadful failings, it says a hell of a lot about the other guy that Kerry is even in the running, let alone overtaking him in the polls.

the only reason kerry hangs on at all is b/c of uneducated people, who don't realistically look at life and what matters. people hate bush for all the reasons they should praise him. it cracks me up, to see all the peace loving hippies of this country, just hate hate hate bush. and can never give an answer that is factual to why they do. at least rightys have facts to not to want (not HATE) kerry in office.

[2strokebloke]

people hate bush for all the reasons they should praise him.

Because being inept is certainly a desirable quality, worthy of praise.
Any president who doesn't understand or defend the constitutional rights upon which our country is built - does not deserve to be in office. Damn, I just described both candidates.
I'd still rather give Kerry a chance, than just sit back and watch GWB screw it up again. I'm a fair guy, Bush got a try - game over. I'm not letting him borrow some more quarters so he can just suck again.