What are Kerry's achievements?

Jemison,

I know we have been going back and forth for a week or two now, but I just want you to know that I dont bear any malice twards you for your opinions. Just want you to know that. And after this election, regardless of the outcome, I hope that you and I, and everyone else at odds here will come back together in a unified body of logic that loves to read, post, and investigate all things while denying ignorance.

I know we have been going back and forth for a week or two now, but I just want you to know that I dont bear any malice twards you for your opinions. Just want you to know that. And after this election, regardless of the outcome, I hope that you and I, and everyone else at odds here will come back together in a unified body of logic that loves to read, post, and investigate all things while denying ignorance.

I couldn't have said it better and I couldn't agree more! Thank you, feeling is mutual!

Jemison

Kerry led the en.wikipedia.org..., where he helped exposed that Reagon was selling weapons to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and using the money to armed terrorists (freedom fighters) in South America.

Originally posted by crontab
Kerry led the en.wikipedia.org..., where he helped exposed that Reagon was selling weapons to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and using the money to armed terrorists (freedom fighters) in South America.

And that would have been great but being Kerry he had to exaggerate (lie if you're a Bush supporter) the truth to make his point:

In a speech before the U.S. Senate on March 27, 1986, Kerry accused President Ronald Reagan of leading the United States into another Vietnam in Central America, accusing the administration of Nixon-like duplicity and saying that he should recognize it because of his Vietnam experience. Kerry told his colleagues he was on Navy duty in Cambodia at a time when President Richard M. Nixon lied to the public and said that there were no U.S. forces in that country. He even took enemy fire. In his words, "I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared - seared - in me."

What's wrong with the speech he made - 1) he wasn't in Cambodia ever and his own campaign has expressed regret over this comment and 2) Nixon wasn't in office until 1969.

He couldn't just stick to the facts and point out that Reagan was dirty dealing behind the back of the American people. He just had to "show boat" for the cameras. It is this kind of BS that ruins his credibility with me and many other moderates and why in an election year that he should be walking away with the election, he isn't.

All you have to do is go to johnkerry.com and you will find all the info you need on John Kerry's record. Pretty impressive resume I must say.

All you have to do is go to johnkerry.com and you will find all the info you need on John Kerry's record. Pretty impressive resume I must say.

LOL. I won't speak for anyone else, but I was looking for something OTHER than what John Kerry is saying about himself. That site is just a tad bit bias, wouldn't you say?


Jemison

Originally posted by AtheiX

Originally posted by Mynaeris
What are Kerry's achievements?

I don't know but Bush's achievements are listed here:
www.crikey.com.au...
To which I'd like to add that he's the first Prez in US history to have his war called 'illegal' by a UN Secy-General

the same Sec. gen that was using the oil for food program to line his son's pockets?

One of my favorite kerry quotes came during Clinton's run for office. Clinton was under fire for avoiding the draft. Kerry, the hero. Kerry the soldier. Kerry with all those purple hearts had this to say:

"I am saddened that Vietnam has yet again been inserted into the campaign."

And then he uses his service record as a major campaigning tool.

They both distort the truth. They both lie.

Here's the difference as I see it. Bush has no qualms about telling us where he stands. Kerry plays coy and vague.

I know that, given the opportunity, Bush will appoint a supreme court justice who, given the chance, would overturn Roe Vs. Wade. Kerry, on the other hand, has promised not to impose his beliefs on the nation (he's a pro lifer as well). What that means to me is when he is in a position to nominate someone for the bench, he will pick someone who has the same beliefs as he does. That person might impose his beliefs on the nation.

Kerry has plans. Great plans. What they are, nobody knows.

I do know that his plan to bring other nations into the coalition in Iraq is a huge joke. France? Right. They're going to lead the charge. Russia? Nope. Germany? Nope. He's not going to convince a group of nations that were secretly dealing with Saddam that they should join us. Not going to happen. They can't do an about face. What would be the reasoning? So they can foot some bills and get their own people killed? No, the united nations crew will always let us foot the largest portion of the bill. What I'd love to see is another 4 years of Bush and company. For one reason. So that when one of those nations needs our help in the form of aid, military backing or any other area , Bush can pick up the phone and tell the leader in need "I'm kinda busy now, can I call you back?"

One of my favorite kerry quotes came during Clinton's run for office. Clinton was under fire for avoiding the draft. Kerry, the hero. Kerry the soldier. Kerry with all those purple hearts had this to say:

"I am saddened that Vietnam has yet again been inserted into the campaign."

Where did you happen to come across that quote? Is there any way you could post a link? IMHO, that quote in and of itself speaks volumes about Kerry.

Jemison

Jemison,

your working way to hard to not buy the demo spin here you need to open your mind......so far open that you can't agree with yourself evidentially. Bush is a failed business man and Kerry has been elected several times that should speak volumes

Rant,

Glad to see you lay out that argument, so if you don�t mind the question did you vote for dole?

here you go jemison:

www.nojohnkerry.org...

there's a site that I can no longer find that compares the removal of Saddam to that of Milosevic and how all the things Clinton did were ok but the same actions by bush are wrong. It's pretty funny.

Jemison,
your working way to hard to not buy the demo spin here you need to open your mind......so far open that you can't agree with yourself evidentially. Bush is a failed business man and Kerry has been elected several times that should speak volumes

I've seen Bush in action for almost 4 years so I know what I'm getting with him. I dont like everything he does, but at least I know where he stands on issues and that is important to me. As much as people hate to admit it, Kerrys position is difficult to determine. He always has to turn everything into fuzzy gray. A lot of what he says can be taken two ways and it gets very old trying to figure out what he stands for.

As far as me saying that Kerrys comment spoke volumes to me, it does. I did not mention HOW it spoke to me, just that it did and that I wanted a link. Don't assume you know what I'm thinking ... I just might be pulling a Kerry.

Jemison

Well, John Kerry was my Senator for about 10 years when I lived in Taxachusetts, and his most memorable accomplishment during that time was:

Posted on 01/25/2004 3:35:55 PM PST by Hon


BOSTON -- Ketchup heiress Teresa Heinz got her indoctrination into the rough-and-tumble of Massachusetts politics last year when a newspaper published a picture of her car parked illegally in front of a fire hydrant.

The license plate -- "HZ57," for "Heinz 57" -- was a dead giveaway.

Now some Bostonians believe they've gotten a return lesson in money and political power: Ms. Heinz and her husband, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., have paid to have the hydrant moved around the corner.
"This both improves the pictorial environment and frees up a parking space," Sen. Kerry's spokesman, Michael Meehan, said in defense of the move. Not everyone is so happy.

"I've lived on Beacon Hill for 47 years and never have I known somebody to get a hydrant moved at their will," said Peter Thomson, president of the Beacon Hill Civic Association. "You know why they did it: Because they jump through hoops when a high-power politician calls up for it."

Now, that's presidential!

And my favorite John Kerry quote on Vietnam:

In a 2002 conversation, Kerry told me he thought it would be doubly advantageous that "I fought in Vietnam and I also fought against the Vietnam War," apparently not recognizing that some would see far too much political calculation in such a bifurcated record.� -- writes David Broder. (8/24/2004)

Some people may see that as playing both sides against the middle, but I see it as the presidential acumen of keeping an open mind.

Hey, so he never authored any significant legislation. He's only been a Senator for 20 years - give him a chance, willya? He can debate real good, can't he? That's worth somethin', ain't it?

This is excactly what they want us to do. Argue and actually think that we have a choice. They both are bad choices for president. So lets vote for the lesser of two evils, that is the choice we get. What a bunch of crap.

Originally posted by RANT


You don't have to agree with the hot button issues Bush pulls out of a 20 year career, like voting against the PBA ban. But I do! Kerry stated the case perfectly last night expressing his morality on the issue, but understanding and respect of everyone's morality and grasp of the role of legislation.

A vote to not kill mothers, is not a vote for PBA's. Kerry had the guts in that one vote example to take a stand. An enormously unpopular stand forced by rigged neocon legislation to try and move closer to placing the life of a fetus above that of the women...and he voted no politcal fallout notwithstanding.

He stood by it. He defended it.

So, whose morality was he "respecting" when he voted against parental notification of abortion? The rapist?

:shk:

Originally posted by marg6043

Of course, we all know what Bush was doing during those 19 years. Bankrupting 3 businesses before bankrupting Texas - then on to bankrupting the US Treasury.

It is hard to focus on Kerry acomplishments when bushes are killing the nation.

Bush is still wildly popular in Texas 4 years after serving his second term as governor. I don't know where you've gotten the idea that he bankrupted Texas, but our state seems to be on a better financial footing, and to have a better economic climate than many others do, which is saying a lot, since we still have no income tax, and our vehicle tax is under $75 for passenger sedan registration.

And it's not the case that Texans support Bush merely because he grew up here. So did Queen Anne (Richards), but her single term as governor ended her political career.

You may choose to paint Bush as horribly incompetent; but he also presided over a sea-change in this state; helping to create the first Republican majority in the state legislature since its incorperation into the United States in 1846.

Democrats really screwed things up, to make a state with such a strong and proud democrat heritage become republican almost overnight.

Perhaps Kerry has done similar things for Massachusetts; I really don't know.

But being a 2-term governor of a state with 22 million people is not automatic; at least not in texas.

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by RANT


You don't have to agree with the hot button issues Bush pulls out of a 20 year career, like voting against the PBA ban. But I do! Kerry stated the case perfectly last night expressing his morality on the issue, but understanding and respect of everyone's morality and grasp of the role of legislation.

A vote to not kill mothers, is not a vote for PBA's. Kerry had the guts in that one vote example to take a stand. An enormously unpopular stand forced by rigged neocon legislation to try and move closer to placing the life of a fetus above that of the women...and he voted no politcal fallout notwithstanding.

He stood by it. He defended it.

So, whose morality was he "respecting" when he voted against parental notification of abortion? The rapist?

:shk:

Not at all. As Kerry demonstrated repeatedly in the debate, legislation is not always what it appears, nor what the extremely oversimplified efforts of Bush would have you believe. Maybe Bush doesn't understand the legislative branch of government, but that's no excuse for Kerry to abuse it or use it as a morality pulpit like Bush does the executive.

When the father is the rapist why should he be notified and asked for permission? Why the refusal of leading conservative legislators to allow for such exceptions as the woman's life or a prayer for judgement in the case of an abused 16 or 17 year old? I mean I know exactly why and the segment it panders to that seeks to outlaw all reproductive rights, and that's just fine. But I respect Kerry's refusal to "go along" with such rigged legislative efforts, and willingness to stand toe to toe with Bush and defend his position while clarifying Bush distortion.

Though the finer points of choice can be argued to death and good intentioned people fall on all ends of the spectrum in every nuance and aspect, most americans still support some choice as does the SCOTUS in it's interpretation of Constitutional law (as of now). Kerry did his job as a representative legislator on that subject, whether everyone agrees or not.

You could argue Cheney did his job too for his constituents when voting against ALL abortion rights even in the case of rape and incest. But I won't go for the cheap shot that Cheney's constituents are rapists and pedohphiles like you just did about Kerry.

I happen to believe protective measures as Kerry has taken in Senate votes for choice were not only correct, but respect everyone's morality more than enforcing the morality of a minority on everyone as neocons increasingly do in their authoritarian efforts.

The caveat remains tax supported healthcare in some circumstances. That's a hard point for choice advocates but just as defensible as bloodthirsty Govenors going for record executions against many, many taxpayers wishes, or questionable invasions and slaughter of tens of thousands on the taxpayers dime. Again, where Kerry supported the funding bill version relying on Iraq Oil money, not taxpayers backs. Is that so wrong?

Was Bush wrong to swear he'd veto any such effort to support the troops that wasn't 100% on the taxpayers back because Iraq needed that oil money more than Americans need their money? Doesn't Bush support the troops? Doesn't he support the taxpayers? Gander, meet Goose.

Confusing isn't it? Legislation I mean. Luckily Kerry has a masterful understanding of the process and he can debate circles around Furious George's misrepresentations and misunderstanding, and will make an excellent President.

Originally posted by Kidfinger
Well, lets see.

1. He was responsible for putting the number two organized crime figure in New England in prison.

2. Elected Leutenant Gov in 1982.

3. Elected to the senate in 1984.

4. Has been reelected to senate 3 times since 1984.

5. He spent 19 years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

6. He voted no on bills that would allow money to go to Iraq that would have been mostly unaccounted for.

7. Your right, Hes NOT George Bush.

The above are the achievements of Kerry listed by you.

In none of the above have you listed or shown what his achievements were during those times of service. I can only assume that you feel that he was re elected or served 19 years on a committee because he did a good job. Can you list some examples of what he did that got him re elected or re assigned?

#7. doesn't count as this was not about Bush but Kerry.

Mary

I do know that his plan to bring other nations into the coalition in Iraq is a huge joke. France? Right. They're going to lead the charge. Russia? Nope. Germany? Nope. He's not going to convince a group of nations that were secretly dealing with Saddam that they should join us. Not going to happen. They can't do an about face. What would be the reasoning? So they can foot some bills and get their own people killed? No, the united nations crew will always let us foot the largest portion of the bill. What I'd love to see is another 4 years of Bush and company. For one reason. So that when one of those nations needs our help in the form of aid, military backing or any other area , Bush can pick up the phone and tell the leader in need "I'm kinda busy now, can I call you back?"

At least Kerry is going to try, thats more than what Bush is willing to do.

I suggest that you all watch Fahrenheit 9/11 and you might see that the Bush administration also has a bit of flip flopping in its blood.

If your not voting for Kerry, that is fine, but don't vote for Bush.

Originally posted by RANT

When the father is the rapist why should he be notified and asked for permission?

Rape is a matter for the police to handle. Trying to masquerade a pro-choice stance with such a weakly crafted argumet of incest is pathetic. The father does not have to be notified. If the abortion doctor is doing his/her duty, then instances of abuse will be reported to the authorities, so Kerry's "logic" falls apart.

You could argue Cheney did his job too for his constituents when voting against ALL abortion rights even in the case of rape and incest. But I won't go for the cheap shot that Cheney's constituents are rapists and pedohphiles like you just did about Kerry.

I challenge you RANT, to show me and the rest of this forum WHERE I made any such insinuation. YOU are the one throwing cheap shots around.

No member of ATS is allowed to make such a #ty insinuation. You are not exempted just because you happen to be a moderator.

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by RANT

When the father is the rapist why should he be notified and asked for permission?

Rape is a matter for the police to handle. Trying to masquerade a pro-choice stance with such a weakly crafted argumet of incest is pathetic. The father does not have to be notified. If the abortion doctor is doing his/her duty, then instances of abuse will be reported to the authorities, so Kerry's "logic" falls apart.

There's no masquerade. In fact it's a perfect rebuttal to your attempt to call Kerry's vote sympathtic to a rapist's morality. Talk about logic falling apart?

It's an example of the individual's right to privacy argument, and the one Kerry happened to use in the debate. And the teen doesn't have to report the rape if she doesn't want to either. Nor does she have to say her parents beat her if she doesn't want to or say ANYTHING to the "authorites" at all. Nor should she have to say her parents will beat her when informed meaning her choices are either being removed from her home or being forced to give birth. The example of being forced to inform the rapist Father of a decision to abort merely demonstrates the allowance for the individual rights over the authoritarian perogative the anti-choice people seek in all matters of choice, not just this one measure.

If you don't like the argument, don't accept it. But it doesn't make it wrong. Just as my (and most Americans) that support some choice don't make anti-choice people wrong, but Kerry has my support on that one. It was the right vote supporting privacy and individual's rights, citing mature teens of 16 or 17 as soverign in matters of their own body. It was NOT supporting Rapist's morality AS YOU CLAIMED.

I challenge you RANT, to show me and the rest of this forum WHERE I made any such insinuation. YOU are the one throwing cheap shots around.

You asked if Kerry was respecting rapist's morality in the very post I cited. And you actually are allowed to make such a "#ty" insinuation about a candidate, just as I'm allowed to call you on it which I did by showing the resulting application of said logic to Cheney's votes. Here's your post again:

Originally posted by jsobecky
So, whose morality was he "respecting" when he voted against parental notification of abortion? The rapist?

:shk:

And this?

No member of ATS is allowed to make such a #ty insinuation. You are not exempted just because you happen to be a moderator.

Please. :shk: No I'm exempt from nothing as a Moderator, but I do get the extra special added bonus of tongue clucking like yours. Thanks for that. Always enjoyable.