• news
  • SATURDAY FEBRUARY 21 2004 3:00 PM

John Kerry- A Man for all Constituencies?

An Op-Ed piece in the Boston Globe about presidential candidate John Kerry highlights how he has apparently shifted his stance on several issues - including the USA Patriot Act, which he endorsed (and helped to draft) during its passage but has since condemned, the Iraq war, which Kerry voted to authorize but has used as a key plank in his campaign against President Bush, his inability to develop a solid stance on capital punishment, and his shifting position on gay marriage.

Is John Kerry pandering to whoever's listening? To answer this question ask yourself another - is he a politician?

 
Comments
Semitic

Semitic

Boston, MA
December 2003

FEB 21, 2004 03:14 PM

Interesting how this is important to point out now. At a time when Kerry is most likely going to be the one tapped. And of course we have never changed our minds on issues or had to bend due to benefit the whole or for self preservation. He is a man and is a politician. That is not a bad thing. The heat is being turned up in his direction. Somebody is getting nervous.

fetology

fetology

Vatican City
November 2003

FEB 21, 2004 03:20 PM

He's a politician. Of course he is pandering to those who are listening. He'll say whatever gets him that $400,000 a year paycheck.

He'd probably even drown a kitten.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

FEB 21, 2004 03:33 PM

At least he doesn't pander to whoever is not listening by using nothing but coded buzzwords Ala GWB


Terrorist,

Terrorist,

Terrorist,

9/11

9/11

God bless America...

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

FEB 21, 2004 03:35 PM

Don't get me wrong, I still think Kerry is a fuckwad, but at least his posse of thugs aren't trying to take over the world.

CuriousFeline

CuriousFeline

Cedar Park, TX
November 2003

FEB 21, 2004 04:44 PM


Take over the world?
sirpsychosexy said on February 21 2004, 3:35 PM


Don't get me wrong, I still think Kerry is a fuckwad, but at least his posse of thugs aren't trying to take over the world.


Yeah, and Bush started w/ Iraq.. confused

At least Bush is cleaning up what Clinton couldn't. All this shit now could have been stopped years ago, Clinton had the power and knowledge to stop Bin Laden and Sadam a long time ago.

Bush is right to help Iraq.. just b/c the democrats are to greedy to spend money to help other countries. It's all MORALS.. anyone remember what those are? Helping people in need?

And Kerry is going to say whatever he can to get a vote.. just like anyone running for president.

Semitic

Semitic

Boston, MA
December 2003

FEB 21, 2004 05:03 PM

CuriousFeline said:

Take over the world?
sirpsychosexy said on February 21 2004, 3:35 PM


Don't get me wrong, I still think Kerry is a fuckwad, but at least his posse of thugs aren't trying to take over the world.


Yeah, and Bush started w/ Iraq.. confused

At least Bush is cleaning up what Clinton couldn't. All this shit now could have been stopped years ago, Clinton had the power and knowledge to stop Bin Laden and Sadam a long time ago.

Bush is right to help Iraq.. just b/c the democrats are to greedy to spend money to help other countries. It's all MORALS.. anyone remember what those are? Helping people in need?

And Kerry is going to say whatever he can to get a vote.. just like anyone running for president.



Your right The American People do NEED THE OIL.

CheshireCat

CheshireCat

Los Angeles, CA
January 2004

FEB 21, 2004 05:03 PM



what Clinton couldnt



There were air strikes going on in Iraq during his term as well;has it ever occured to anyone that things are going according to a drawn out plan by the U.S. government and that who ever is in office only takes the brunt of the people when these plans are carried out. On a side note it seems strange how Kerry came in all of a sudden and just bombarded Dean out of the race..........people need to stop thinking in terms of political parties having any diiferances from one another,also Kerry like Bush was a member of the infamous Skull and Bones just like Bush so maybe when you vote for Kerry you vote for Bush as well or at least the same political beliefs....hmmm tricky no???

PopTone

PopTone

Pittsburgh, PA
February 2004

FEB 21, 2004 05:29 PM

CuriousFeline said:

Bush is right to help Iraq.. just b/c the democrats are to greedy to spend money to help other countries. It's all MORALS.. anyone remember what those are? Helping people in need?
.







This succinctly sums up my feelings about that.

CheshireCat

CheshireCat

Los Angeles, CA
January 2004

FEB 21, 2004 05:57 PM



Helping people in need??



BULLSHIT!!!! if that were true how come there are still so many problems in this country like education funding, job market, urban renewal, environmental issues which is a global issue one that this idiotic administration pays no attention to except maybe claiming that global warming is a fraud. The men who run this country sold it out a long time ago and the ones running it now are looking to sell out yr civil liberties as well. And spare me the compassion for peoples rights in other countries;if there was not a invested interest in those areas we would not be there.

crt3k

crt3k

Palm Coast, FL
February 2004

FEB 21, 2004 06:36 PM

CuriousFeline said:
Bush is right to help Iraq.. just b/c the democrats are to greedy to spend money to help other countries. It's all MORALS.. anyone remember what those are? Helping people in need?



Dear CuriousFeline,
WTF?
Love, crt3k

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

FEB 21, 2004 07:33 PM

CuriousFeline said:

Take over the world?
sirpsychosexy said on February 21 2004, 3:35 PM


Don't get me wrong, I still think Kerry is a fuckwad, but at least his posse of thugs aren't trying to take over the world.

Yeah, and Bush started w/ Iraq.. confused

...

And Kerry is going to say whatever he can to get a vote.. just like anyone running for president.



I completely agree that Kerry is going to say whatever he can to get a vote, so will Bush, as he did in 2000.



Bush is right to help Iraq.. just b/c the democrats are to greedy to spend money to help other countries. It's all MORALS.. anyone remember what those are? Helping people in need?



This is utter nonsense, if this were the policy of the bush administration, we would have invaded all the other countries that oppress there people. If not invaded, we would have at least put political pressure on them.

What about Uzbekistan?

Uzbekistan is a country that is almost identical to pre-war Iraq with a saddam clone dictator restricting civil rights, elimination political opposition, and disappearing 10's of thousands of people a year just like saddam.
We gave him 150+ Million dollars last year, over 70 million went, not to fixing roads, or for food, it went DIRECTLY to the dictators secret police force to continue to oppress and kill his own people.

For 10 years I have said we should re-invade Iraq, I have a problem with why we did it now, and how GW tried to trick the US (August 2001 I could not find enough people to agree that we should invade Iraq, neither did the presedent) into supporting a war they would never agree to without him getting on TV and twisting words every way but sunday to try and say that Saddam had something to do with 9/11 without actually saying the words.


Just for fun: Since when are republicans for helping people in need; with money tongue

AkiraLi

AkiraLi

Norristown, PA
March 2003

FEB 21, 2004 11:27 PM

CuriousFeline said:

Bush is right to help Iraq.. just b/c the democrats are to greedy to spend money to help other countries. It's all MORALS.. anyone remember what those are? Helping people in need?

And Kerry is going to say whatever he can to get a vote.. just like anyone running for president.





right. And I'm sure it had absolutely nothing to do with Bush Sr.'s lil grudge against Sadaam or the attempts Sadaam made on daddy dearest's life
surreal

dragonreborn

dragonreborn

USA
OLD SKOOL

FEB 22, 2004 05:58 AM

i really take this as not just something senator kerry is saying just to get votes, i look at it as a huge character flaw. what would a man like this have done right after 9-11? would he tryed to appeased two crowds or gone with his gut feeling. if i were voting in the lefty party i would have to say edwards just based on kerry's past slip and slide record.

Phoebus

Phoebus

Italy
OLD SKOOL

FEB 22, 2004 06:38 AM

Jesus, this is not so difficult. We did not spend 87 fucking billion dollars to ensure Iraqis lived happy lives any more than we did trying to get more petroleum. We spent 87 billion dollars furthering an agenda whose ultimate aim is for America to remain on top. The people behind this strategy believed that suplanting Saddam Hussein with a friendly government willing to allow a US force within its borders would ensure an undeniable presence in the Mid East, putting greater pressure on not-so-friendly nations to "see things our way". Petroleum and security are by-products of this greater agenda--not the main prize.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your flavor of politics), President G.W. Bush and his government (of which Senator Kerry is a part of) did not do a stellar job of carrying this plan through. Bush & Co. counted on people joining in on the idea of making Iraq a better place, but bad planning and execution on the rebuilding of the state have turned many people sour. Never mind that international opinion was much more "con" than they probably expected.

Now, Senator Kerry is running for President. Surprise, surprise, his platform is being against what Pres. Bush did--even those things he was a part of. Some people will call this hypocrisy, others will call it being honest enough to admit past wrongs, and still others will call it just being a politician. At the end of the day, there is a large number of Americans dissatisfied with the way things are, and it's election year. John Kerry is running for President, and those are the people he has to champion.

What I am waiting to see is how well Sen. Kerry (who I believe will probably win this election) will handle his presidency. I have no doubt that Pres. Bush and his people believed that they were doing right by America in their actions these past couple of years--just as I have no illusions about the fact that they consciously combined those (tainted) ideals with the typically political instinct to reward friends (a-la Haliburton et co.). I want to see if Sen. Kerry is just running for President to beat G.W. Bush, or if he's doing it out of a sincere desire to improve the US and the world at large by means of a better agenda.