October 7 - 12, 2004

October 7, 2004 (4:35pm)
John Kerry Flip-Flops:
DNC (7/29/04) - “I will be a commander in chief who’ll never mislead us into war”
Face the Nation (9/23/01) - “It is something that we know, for instance, Saddam Hussein has used WMD against his own people, and there is some evidence that there are efforts to try to secure these kinds of weapons and even test them”
The O’Reilly Factor (12/11/01) - “He is and has acted like a terrorist and he has engaged in activities that are unacceptable... I think we ought to put the heat on Saddam Hussein. I’ve said that for a number of years, Bill, I criticized the Clinton administration for backing off of the inspections when ambassador Butler was giving us strong evidence that we needed to continue. I think we need to put the pressure on no matter what the evidence is about September 11th.”
Hardball (2/5/02)
Larry King Live (12/14/01): KING: What about enhancing this war, Senator Kerry. What are your thoughts on going on further than Afghanistan, all terrorist places...KERRY: Oh, I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn't end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It's a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue, for instance, Saddam Hussein. I think we...KING: We should go to Iraq?KERRY: Well, that -- what do you and how you choose to do it, we have a lot of options. Absent smoking gun evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the immediate events of September 11, the president doesn't have the authorization to proceed forward there.
San Francisco Chronicle (9/6/02) "We're not getting enough to make an informed decision," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.
New York Times Kerry op-ed (9/6/02) “If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community’s already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement, even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act.”
Face the Nation (9/14/03) - Interviewer: “If that amendment does not pass, will you then vote against the $87 billion?” Kerry: “I don’t think any United States Senator is going to abandon our troops and recklessly leave Iraq to whatever follows as a result of simply cutting and running. That’s irresponsible. What is responsible is for the administration to do this properly now.”
(S, 1689 10/17/03) vote against $87B
S.J. Res. 2 (1/12/91) vote against Gulf War
1st Debate: “The reason for going to war was WMD, not the removal of Saddam Hussein.”
CNN: “Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off w/out Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer w/ his capture don’t have the judgement to be president.”
Says we should increase funding for the war, but criticized the president for spending $200B on the war.”
Kerry brags in Detroit about owning a bunch of SUVs, but when asked about his comments on earth day, he first denied them only to later revise his answer to “my family owns a suburban.”

So, is Kerry a Flip-Flopper? My answer:

When asked whether he thought Saddam would cooperate and allow weapons inspectors back in, or if it would require the U.S. to use force, Kerry said that, although he didn’t envision Saddam ever fully complying, it was necessary for the U.S. to first pursue a route of renewed inspections through the U.N. If, or when this process failed, then he presumably would’ve approved preemptive action in Iraq. Kerry predicated his contention that Saddam posed a serious threat to the U.S. and the world on the dictator’s history as a terrorist and terrorist supporter, and specifically, on the possibility that he might leak WMDs to hostile third parties. The Senator voiced agreement with the President’s decision to treat terrorists and nations harboring them without distinction and to make this a global war. Kerry’s argument to pressure Iraq did not originate from an impression that there were ties between Hussein and al-Qaeda.
John Kerry also said on CNN’s “Larry King Live” in December of 2001 that without a smoking gun linking Hussein to 9/11, the President had no authorization for the use of force in Iraq. This strikes me as somewhat inconsistent with his earlier statements. If Kerry endorsed the Bush Administration’s stance on the global war on terror, then the fact that Saddam Hussein was a terrorist, whether or not he had links to al-Qaeda and 9/11, was enough to call for aggressive measures. Kerry’s statement also provokes the question, “whose authorization did the President need?” From Congress? From the international community? Although I strongly disagree with the senator’s wisdom, I think I understand his position. Kerry asserts the president’s right to defend the nation with or without the consent of the global community, but only after exhausting all possible options in the U.N. In principle, there’s nothing wrong with this stand. In reality, however, the U.N.’s incompetence and inefficiency render it virtually worthless and even potentially dangerous to the U.S... (not finished)
Michael Moore on “The O’Reilly Factor” Transcript

3/16/04 “I actually did vote for the $87B before...” 7/12/04 - says he is proud that he and Edwards voted against.

October 8, 2004 (6:09am)
Donald Rumsfeld Speech at the Council on Foreign Relations (10/4/04)

*The 911 Commission Report Summary

October 11, 2004 (12:16pm)
2nd Presidential Debate: Kerry claims he always said Iraq was a threat; later in the debate he criticizes Bush for diverting resources from Afghanistan and focusing on Iraq where there was no threat.

Rush Limbaugh: last year Kerry’s paid 12.5% in taxes; Bush paid ±30%

October 12, 2004 (11:26am)
In April Kerry buys into Bob Woodward’s conspiracy that Bush plans on cutting a secret deal with the Saudis to lower oil prices before the election. Today, Kerry accuses Bush of keeping prices high so his rich oil buddies will reap huge profits. This, of course, is completely ridiculous; not to mention it contradicts his previous statements. Why on earth would the President intentionally spike oil prices right before an election? It makes no sense. And Kerry, no doubt, knows this. So why toss around such accusations he obviously can’t reasonably believe himself?

*I just remembered something from the Democratic Primary Debates/Forums: while several of the candidates criticized Bush’s tax cuts, saying they benefitted the wealthy and did little for the middle class, Joe Lieberman corrected them. The Connecticut senator said something along the lines of: “Now let’s be honest. President Bush’s tax cuts have given middle class families, on average, over a thousand/several thousand dollars. It’s inaccurate to say his cuts don’t benefit the middle class.”