Kerry criticizes Hillary: Mr Pot, meet Mr. Kettle (1 Viewer)

[oldreliable67]

The Washington Post reports on the proceedings at Hillary's and Kerry's appearances at the Take Back America conference at the Washington Hilton. On vivid display were the Democratic Party's divisions over the foreign policy issue that might well dominate this year's midterm elections:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) drew boos and hisses from an audience of liberal activists yesterday as she defended her opposition to a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq, and later she received an implicit rebuke from Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) for failing to acknowledge that her support for the war was a mistake. . . .

"I have to just say it," she began. "I do not think it is a smart strategy either for the president to continue with his open-ended commitment, which I think does not put enough pressure on the new Iraqi government, nor do I think it is smart strategy to set a date certain. I do not agree that that is in the best interest of our troops or our country."

After Hilary's remarks, Kerry declared, "We cannot have it both ways in the war in Iraq." From OpinionJournal.com's "Best of the Web Today", here is a partial list of the positions Kerry has taken on the war in Iraq:

* "The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last four years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for four years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation."--Oct. 9, 2002

* "Yea."--vote on authorizing military force to liberate Iraq, Oct. 12, 2002

* "Even having botched the diplomacy, it is the duty of any president, in the final analysis, to defend this nation and dispel the security threat. . . . Saddam Hussein has brought military action upon himself by refusing for 12 years to comply with the mandates of the United Nations."--March 18, 2003

* "The vote is the vote. I voted to authorize. It was the right vote, and the reason I mentioned the threat is that we gave the--we had to give life to the threat. If there wasn't a legitimate threat, Saddam Hussein was not going to allow inspectors in. Now, let me make two points if I may. Ed [Gordon] questioned my answer. The reason I can't tell you to a certainty whether the president misled us is because I don't have any clue what he really knew about it, or whether he was just reading what was put in front of him. And I have no knowledge whether or not this president was in depth--I just don't know that. And that's an honest answer, and there are serious suspicions about the level to which this president really was involved in asking the questions that he should've. With respect to the question of, you know, the vote--let's remember where we were. If there hadn't been a vote, we would never have had inspectors. And if we hadn't voted the way we voted, we would not have been able to have a chance of going to the United Nations and stopping the president, in effect, who already had the votes, and who was obviously asking serious questions about whether or not the Congress was going to be there to enforce the effort to create a threat. So I think we did the right thing. I'm convinced we did."--Sept. 9, 2003

* "Nay."--vote on $87 billion to fund operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, Oct. 17, 2003

* "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."--March 16, 2004

* "The president made a mistake in invading Iraq."--Sept. 30, 2004

* "No."--answer to Jim Lehrer's question "Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?," Sept. 30, 2004

* " I was wrong to vote for that Iraqi resolution."--June 13, 2006

No wonder Kerry says you can't have it both ways--as nuanced as he is, he's had it at least half a dozen ways!

 

[Captain America]

Kerry is much like the weather around here. Changes every half hour.:rofl

 

[Hoot]

No wonder Kerry says you can't have it both ways--as nuanced as he is, he's had it at least half a dozen ways!

This has been gone over a thousand times or more in these forums.

Voting for authorizing the use of military force against Iraq DOES NOT neccessarily mean "boots on the ground."

The 87 billion was more right wing spin...Kerry voted for the 87 billion with a stipulation that we would be reimbursed by the Iraqi government. When he found out we wouldn't get a penny back, he was against funding this war.

What is so difficult to understand? I wish to God this debt was only 87 billion. To me, that's another lie or flip/flop by Bush...distorting what the true cost of this war would be to the American taxpayer.

 

[Auftrag]

Kerry is much like the weather around here. Changes every half hour.:rofl

Do you ever post anything that consists of more than a one liner or a suck up to a moderator?

 

[Captain America]

Aufrag....when will you realize that hardly anybody around here gives a sh** what you think other than to tell you what a low life you are?

Now, mind you, I am not saying you are a low life. That would be a personal insult and a clear violation of forum rules. Something I try to avoid at all costs. I am merely commenting on just about everyone else that says you are. (I just wanted to make that clear. )

Have a nice Nazi day! :2wave:

 

[ECW]

One of the signs of an intelligent mind is to recognize when you have made a mistake. Mr Kerry has admitted that he made a mistake in supporting the Quagmire In Iraq. He saw what a mess this administration made of it and re-assessed his position. It should scream volumes to you that Our Worst President Ever has not been able to make that determination in spite of overwhelming evidence that he messed things up from the word go.

Ms Clinton is running for re-election to her Senate post and may be considering a run for the White House. She is playing the "moderate" game trying to pull in as many of those as she can to win her seat. Her support of the war is but a part of that. She will take a hammering for that view and how she deals with that hammering will show the country what kind of leader she really is. Remember, Democrats do not take their talking points from Howard Dean the way Republicans take their talking points from Karl Rove. They also do not go around the country sounding exactly alike the way Republicans do. Thus, you will have dissent within the party. We see it as healthy. Sorry if the point is lost on you.