Please Watch

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 7, 2004, 7:11 pm

An excellent clip showing Kerry's views of Iraq and Saddam.

http://www.kerryoniraq.com/

Mak · Post by **Mak** » August 7, 2004, 8:49 pm

Midnyte,

I'm not a John Kerry fan. I think he's one of the more liberal Democrats out there. But, a man is entitled to change his mind as new or updated information becomes available.

The fact that he held one position 2, 5, or 30 years ago does not mean he is required to maintain that same position in perpetuity. Picking apart a single quote, a single vote, or a single position from the past is not as telling as everyone thinks it is, left or right. (Unless, of course, that quote is something like, "I was drunk driving and drove off a bridge and let a woman drown" or "I did not have sex with that woman".)

Now if you wanted to take the collective of 30 years worth of public service, identify common denominators and trends and form an opinion on a man, go for it.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 7, 2004, 8:53 pm

Don't try to use logic with him, it is a waste of time.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » August 7, 2004, 9:03 pm

It says something about the canidate when the worst attack the most vicious negative campeghn in American history (Bush Cheney 2004...undisputeable)'s worst attack is that a man is able to live up to his mistakes and continue to progress in a progressive world by updating his views, something i see as a strength, not a weakness.
I would rather have a "flip flopper" then a man who cannot admit he has ever made a single mistake in his entire life for president anyways
Ive never been to big for either democrates or republicans, but i honestly think kerry is one of the best democrates up there, besides his tax increases for certain americans i agree with almost all his issues,

and at one point in my life...17 years ago when i was like 5 years old i was a little douchebag who thought we should kill all non christian people becouse my grandmother told me everyone who wasnt catholic was wrong, I also wasnt comtherable around black people or any non white people for that manner, i would make fun of my housekeepers kids becouse they couldnt speak english too well...but that was 17 fucking years ago

Mak · Post by **Mak** » August 7, 2004, 9:36 pm

Settle down, Xzion. That is "disputeable" by quite a lot. I've seen local races with more venom than this so far, at least so far as the official campaign organizations go.

But, I have seen a fuckton of negative things directed at GWB from a zillion different sources- Hollywood movies, well-financed web sites, a plethora of books, etc. all more or less comparing Bush to Satan. Now I fully acknowledge that these sources represent the feelings of a large portion of our population, and so I don't blame the Kerry campaign for all of that. The same can be said in the other direction as well. Someone of your wisdom, experience, and worldy knowledge should be able to draw that distinction as well.

And Kelshara, it's not my logic that I'm relying on with Midnyte, it's the fact that I didn't call him a single name in my entire post. I kept it civil, and yes, I do expect him to give a decent and civil reply in return. We might actually, believe it or not, have a "discussion" on the topic instead of a rant-filled hate fest. It probably won't be as entertaining, I'm sure, but we might actually get something resolved.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 7, 2004, 11:14 pm

You'd make a good conservative Xzion! Come on over!

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 8, 2004, 12:01 am

Get something resolved.. heh right.

Mak · Post by **Mak** » August 8, 2004, 1:04 am

Hey, it could happen!

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 8, 2004, 1:47 am

You simpletons miss the point.

The point is you can't slam Bush for feeling the exact same way as Kerry, yet give Kerry a pass.

You really need to take a step back and realize you look very fanatical and unreasonable by bashing one and not the other.

Kerry was speaking in common sense terms before he decided he would be running again. Then he became what was deemed necessary by the Dems to be an effective candidate and have a chance at beating Bush.

It was said millions of times after the 2000 election. That the Dems were becoming to centrist, moving too much toward the middle. (Where I think most of reasonable Americans are btw). They made this move and in bold fanatical fashion.

Please try and be at least moderately reasonable. Try not to be so blind to your hipocracy.

Mak · Post by **Mak** » August 8, 2004, 11:11 am

That's all great, except for the fact that the lefties haven't been accusing Bush of being a flip-flopper. They've been accusing him of being a stupid dumbass.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 8, 2004, 11:33 am

heh I win.

Rasspotari · Post by **Rasspotari** » August 8, 2004, 2:16 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:You simpletons miss the point.

bwahahahahahah

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » August 8, 2004, 6:46 pm

Winnow wrote:You'd make a good conservative Xzion! Come on over!

Maybee....but the problem is that i dont like to sleep with fat chicks

(nildven does though!)
We all know liberal girls>fat, pissed off pale virgin conservative chicks

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 8, 2004, 7:04 pm

Xzion wrote:
Winnow wrote:You'd make a good conservative Xzion! Come on over!

Maybee....but the problem is that i dont like to sleep with fat chicks (nildven does though!)
We all know liberal girls>fat, pissed off pale virgin conservative chicks

I'll take some of this conservative.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » August 8, 2004, 7:46 pm

i would too if she came with a ball gag

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 8, 2004, 7:51 pm

Xzion wrote: We all know liberal girls>fat, pissed off pale virgin conservative chicks

I had the unfortunate opportunity to watch the Democrat Convention in High Definition.

Tip to democrats for 2008:

Don't zoom in on the faces in the crowd. I've already sent an email to Bush HQ suggesting they use the women of Star Trek "blur" lens for the republican convention!

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » August 8, 2004, 7:53 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Xzion wrote:
Winnow wrote:You'd make a good conservative Xzion! Come on over!

Maybee....but the problem is that i dont like to sleep with fat chicks (nildven does though!)
We all know liberal girls>fat, pissed off pale virgin conservative chicks

I'll take some of this conservative.

ann coulter? ehehehehkk, her ass is probrably afraid to get sun for fear that shel be confused for a inferior hispanic
She looks like she was re-animated from the dead...her facial structure is also pretty manly...that and shes a batshit insane pissed off nazi...hell id go for the fat chick

Mak · Post by **Mak** » August 8, 2004, 10:47 pm

Kelshara wrote:heh I win.

Yup, I stand corrected. My apologies.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » August 8, 2004, 11:46 pm

See... the problem with this is that to me, it doesn't say anything negative about Kerry at all. He's a dumbass who makes himself look bad when he opens his mouth, but all these "flip-flop" accusations do is show that he's capable of processing new information instead of insisting that it doesn't matter (see: the crackpots propping up Baby Bush). If anything, they make him look better than that grinning twit could ever make himself look.

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » August 9, 2004, 12:05 am

Mid,

I do not think that it is a bad thing if a politician changes his/her mind. In fact I think that is a trait I would prefer in a good leader.

Most of our beliefs are based on the information we have to process the judgement. If our information is lacking then our initial judgement is also lacking. Is it really a bad thing that when presented with more information that a person changes their mind??

I am all for a person holding to their convictions, but if they hold on to them just to avoid being termed a "flip flopper" then I do not want them representing me. If he changes his view every week or month then I agree, he is just appeasing voters, but if he stands behind this new conviction then who are you or I to say he is not firm in his beliefs?

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 9, 2004, 8:33 am

Tyek wrote:Mid,

I do not think that it is a bad thing if a politician changes his/her mind. In fact I think that is a trait I would prefer in a good leader.

Most of our beliefs are based on the information we have to process the judgement. If our information is lacking then our initial judgement is also lacking. Is it really a bad thing that when presented with more information that a person changes their mind??

I am all for a person holding to their convictions, but if they hold on to them just to avoid being termed a "flip flopper" then I do not want them representing me. If he changes his view every week or month then I agree, he is just appeasing voters, but if he stands behind this new conviction then who are you or I to say he is not firm in his beliefs?

I completely agree. The problem is, he didn't "change his mind". His view was changed for him, because it was politically benficial for him to do so. That is where I have a problem with Kerry, and really most politicians these days. I admire Bush and his willingness to lead by his convictions and listen to every little blip in the polls.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » August 9, 2004, 9:17 am

I admire Bush and his willingness to lead by his convictions and listen to every little blip in the polls.

You refer to the war? You know the one that most of the US are against, the one where the reasons for the war (apart from the oil) have proven false? If thats listening to the people, and changing of mind when your ideas are proven wrong, i dont wanna see your idea of someone who keep his goals no matter what the facts are

miir · Post by **miir** » August 9, 2004, 10:26 am

The problem is, he didn't "change his mind". His view was changed for him, because it was politically benficial for him to do so.

Or maybe he changed his mind when it was shown that the information he based his original opinion on was faulty, inaccurate and incorrect.

Aside from that, the video didn't shed any new light on any of this.
His opinions on Iraq are a matter of public record and anyone that knows how to use google could find it.

But I guess some simpletons need it spelled out for them with pretty pictures, music and narrative.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 9, 2004, 10:58 am

Hesten wrote:
I admire Bush and his willingness to lead by his convictions and listen to every little blip in the polls.
You refer to the war? You know the one that most of the US are against, the one where the reasons for the war (apart from the oil) have proven false? If thats listening to the people, and changing of mind when your ideas are proven wrong, i dont wanna see your idea of someone who keep his goals no matter what the facts are

What you refuse to understand is, it is not a matter of right and wrong. It is a purely partisan issue.

CBS News/New York Times Poll. July 11-15, 2004. N=955 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (total sample).

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?"

Approve Disapprove Don't Know
% % %
ALL 37 58 5

Republicans 73 20 7
Democrats 13 83 4
Independents 32 63 5

"Looking back, do you think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, or should the U.S. have stayed out?"

Did Right Thing Should Have Stayed Out Don't Know
% % %
ALL 45 51 4
Republicans 78 18 4
Democrats 22 72 6
Independents 42 55 3

Thess · Post by **Thess** » August 9, 2004, 11:29 am

miir wrote:
The problem is, he didn't "change his mind". His view was changed for him, because it was politically benficial for him to do so.
Or maybe he changed his mind when it was shown that the information he based his original opinion on was faulty, inaccurate and incorrect.

Aside from that, the video didn't shed any new light on any of this.
His opinions on Iraq are a matter of public record and anyone that knows how to use google could find it.

But I guess some simpletons need it spelled out for them with pretty pictures, music and narrative.

I absolutely agree with Miir. While I was skeptical about the whole Iraq war - I was not filled with the information that our congress got.

I would think that our congress should believe the information given to them in order to go to war, that information turned out to be wrong - when it was, Kerry changed his stance on his vote.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 9, 2004, 11:41 am

the same $87 million dollar Iraq vote that Kerry voted against, George W. Bush threatened to veto 2 different times until the version that finally passed was put together.

Post by **Sylvus** » August 9, 2004, 12:22 pm

And some of those clips in that video are dubious at best. The first few he's focusing on how we need to "put pressure on terrorism" globally, and even in the one where Chris Matthews asks him if he thinks we can deal with Saddam through sanctions and inspections Kerry says that he believes we need to do that. Please note that he doesn't say we need to carpet bomb Baghdad.

I've always thought Saddam was a bad guy who needed to be deposed and I think that the way we went into Iraq was unecessary. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » August 9, 2004, 1:51 pm

What you refuse to understand is, it is not a matter of right and wrong. It is a purely partisan issue

Independents 32 63 5

Independents 42 55 3

...

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » August 9, 2004, 3:24 pm

What you refuse to understand is, it is not a matter of right and wrong. It is a purely partisan issue.

Damn, if you really think that starting a war on a country for false unproved reasons, or even going to war at all, are not a question of right or wrong, you should seek help.

Marbus · Post by **Marbus** » August 10, 2004, 12:04 pm

There is no way for anyone, myself included nor you Rebublicans, to know why Kerry changed his mind. Personally I want someone as President who is able to modify his beliefs based upon new relevant information, hell if Bush could do that we wouldn't be in Iraq... but that's another issue. Fact is people for Kerry will see if one way and Bush supports will see it another and I doubt VERY seriously that any of us is going to convince the other side we are correct... because truly, only Kerry knows why.

Marb

Midnyte_Ragebringer · August 10, 2004, 12:22 pm

Marbus wrote:There is no way for anyone, myself included nor you Rebublicans, to know why Kerry changed his mind. Personally I want someone as President who is able to modify his beliefs based upon new relevant information, hell if Bush could do that we wouldn't be in Iraq... but that's another issue. Fact is people for Kerry will see if one way and Bush supports will see it another and I doubt VERY seriously that any of us is going to convince the other side we are correct... because truly, only Kerry knows why.

Marb

I don't know about that Marb. It's politics. It's not hard to figure it out. Bush went into Iraq because we were right next door and he could avenge his fathers unfinished job. There happens to be many more benefits as a result, which is cool. Kerry, changed to help get himself elected. He hasn't been a man of principles ever. Always flopping back and forth. Nothing a little common sense can't figure out.

miir · Post by **miir** » August 10, 2004, 12:31 pm

Kerry, changed to help get himself elected. He hasn't been a man of principles ever. Always flopping back and forth. Nothing a little common sense can't figure out.

How can you seriously use the term 'common sense'.

What exactly is wrong with changing your opinion on something when you are provided with new information and facts? I know that concept is alein to you Mid, but people in the real world are allowed to change thier mind.

For example, if the US were to have found mass stockpiles of WMDs and strong evidence of weapons programs (chem, nuke, etc), you would have seen every single one of us 'pussy liberals' changing our minds and backing the invasion of Iraq.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » August 10, 2004, 12:43 pm

"For example, if the US were to have found mass stockpiles of WMDs and strong evidence of weapons programs (chem, nuke, etc), you would have seen every single one of us 'pussy liberals' changing our minds and backing the invasion of Iraq."

Liar!! You know you would say " OMG the Americans planted it"

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » August 10, 2004, 1:30 pm

miir wrote:What exactly is wrong with changing your opinion on something when you are provided with new information and facts?

Kerry has proven himself to be very adept at changing his opinion...

...every time a new poll comes along.

Actually John Kerry has proven to have an extraordinary capability to have a strong opinion and to harbor it through all trials and tribulations...

...He is strongly pro-Kerry.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 10, 2004, 2:10 pm

And that is worse than Bush/Cheney still claiming connections that have been proven wrong by CIA for several months? What is worse, changing opinion with new information or clinging to old lies?