Defense Technologies John Kerry Voted Against Creating and Funding

The B-1 bomber.
The B-2 bomber.
The F-15 Eagle tactical fighter
The F-14D Tomcat fighter
The AH-64 Apache Helicopter
The AV-8B Harrier "jump" jet
The Patriot Missile
The Aegis air-defense system
The Trident missile

Kerry also sought to reduce the funding for procurement of the following:

The M1 Abrams tank
The Bradley Fighting Vehicle
The Tomahawk cruise missile
The F-16 Falcon fighter/attack jet

I would love to hear John Kerry defend his votes against these programs. He might even have a good reason for it. Unfortunately, whenever he is asked about these votes he says the questioner is "attacking his patriotism" or "attacking his record in Viet Nam."

I wish he would just defend his votes. If he has a good reason, lets hear it. I wish he would stop pretending that asking him about votes he made in the US Senate equals attacking his service in Viet Nam.

*Sputter, cough, growl* Moron.

YOU TELL ME WHICH ONE HAS THE EXPERIENCE NECESSARY TO BE LEADER IN CHIEF!!

Let’s talk about the latest attacks. Dick Cheney has the audacity to question John Kerry’s credentials to be commander in chief, right? First, I remind everybody that Bush and Cheney have no war record. None. Zero war record. John Kerry on the other hand took three bullets in Vietnam, won three Purple Hearts, the Bronze Star, the Silver Star, and a Presidential Unit Citation for Extraordinary Heroism.

Then Cheney says Kerry is soft on defense because he voted against the Apache helicopter. The fact is, when he was Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney killed the Apache helicopter. These guys are complete hypocrites. The record shows that Cheney, as Secretary of Defense, boasted to Congress that he had killed 81 different weapons programs. And then Cheney attacks Kerry for voting against the Apache helicopter. We can’t let them get away with these lies. We have to expose every one of them. And I think the American people will see the truth and appreciate the truth.

Quote:

---

Bush lied, and people died

---

[B]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kestra
[B] First, I remind everybody that Bush and Cheney have no war record. None. Zero war record.

---

Nor did President Clinton, but that's not saying much since he was a disgrace as a President anyways. So, what's your point? Are you saying that in order to be a good leader and have the ability to make sound decisions..you have to have a war record?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kestra
[B]
John Kerry on the other hand took three bullets in Vietnam, won three Purple Hearts, the Bronze Star, the Silver Star, and a Presidential Unit Citation for Extraordinary Heroism.

---

Heroism for committing war crimes? He admitted to committing war crimes and then tried to BLAME hire ups that created zones for purposes intended to facilitate military operations. He admitted to taking advantage of policies and established boundaries meant to help our soldiers succeed and USED those as excuses to commit atrocious acts that are prohibited by the Geneva Convention and then he blamed the hire ups for HIS war crimes.

Then he says later in life that his words were those of an angry, young man. He's no different now than he was then. He votes, he makes bold statements. Then when confronted and proven as a hypocrit, he waffles and then blames the "hire ups"....oh but they lied to him so THAT'S why his record reflects such disgusting behavior in his voting. I hope he loses the election by a landslide just to show how disgusted people are with folks like him.

A good link that you should check out: http://fluxview.com/v/FNVA-John_Kerry.htm

Take the first two links on that page to better understand why I feel the way I do about this man. He even admits to commiting war crimes and then tries to implicate our country as being full of people who are doing the same thing!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotle

I would love to hear John Kerry defend his votes against these programs. He might even have a good reason for it. Unfortunately, whenever he is asked about these votes he says the questioner is "attacking his patriotism" or "attacking his record in Viet Nam."

---

Because he is ashamed of his irresponsible behavior AFTER the fact..after returning home from the war...where he participated in activities that furthered the mistreatment and torture of our prisoners of war.

It is truly my belief that THIS man, John Kerry, is just another hater of the US. He is disloyal and everyone knows it and the only way he can hide this fact is to claim to have been some sort of hero in a war that he disagreed with because he made mistakes during the war of which he was terribly ashamed.

He participated in the disrespectful tossing of Vietnam war honor medals that were deserving of the young soldiers fighting the war while he was safe back in the US, yet now he boldly holds his own medals with such pride????

There are now legitimate sites being established by Vietnam Veterans and their families shunning his so-called "Patriotism" because they didn't much appreciate his behavior while his fellow comrades were being tortured and/or still at war fighting for their lives and for this country.

He is a disgrace and he continues to hide behind it rather than fess up and apologize for putting our soldiers in MORE harm. I believe he'll do the same for the country if he were ever to become President. He'd be out apologizing to the world for America's atrocities...he being, admittedly, one of the biggest offenders.

Sorry for the length of this post, and I do apologize for the passion with which I wrote about this Presidential candidate, but I have no respect for him whatsoever.

I hope I didn't go off topic, but yes..I'd be curious to hear how he would defend his voting record, especially when it comes to the military. I'm also tired of him whining about his questionable "patriotism".

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kestra
[B]YOU TELL ME WHICH ONE HAS THE EXPERIENCE NECESSARY TO BE LEADER IN CHIEF!!

---

*cough* *sputter*

Im not sure who has the experience necessary to be leader in chief. But Im pretty sure that President Bush, being the current Commander-in-Chief through TWO wars has enough experience under his belt to do the job.

I dont think I need to address anything else you said.

Oh, and I do disagree with what Pyrosama said.. almost totally. I do not think that Senator Kerry is a "US HATER". I think that he has, or at the least the idealists in his party have, very strong views about how the country should be run and in what direction the President of the United States should take it.

While I really do not like Senator Kerry and I think that he would make a horrible President, I dont think it's fair to rip into him the way you just did. NOW that doesn't mean you shouldn't rip into him, recently 'Good Morning America' did a really nice job of doing it. They started off by asking him what he had planned for our troops, he mentioned the 'things he's already done, such as voting for bill x,y, or z', then the host moved on to domestic policy and Kerry responded the same, then the host moved on to international policy, same response from Kerry. Well after these responses the Host really went on the offensive and started playing video clips of Kerry speaking out against things like body armor for troops as 'an unnecessary cost'. Now this is an example of a real good burn, Kerry then tried to say he never voted against such a bill, that the clip was taken out of context. The host let him hang himself and then when Kerry tried to assert that he would have never voted against such a bill the host put the voting record up on the screen for everyone to see. Kerry basically hung himself at this point.

Pyro, don't apologize for being passionate. That's a good thing.

While I believe Kerry is no angel, I'd vote for him way before I'd vote for Bush.
War is never pretty, so I'm told.....and nobody escapes it unscathed.

Bush has done a lousy job on the war on terror.

I heard a great quote the other day:"Saddam Hussein was to 911, as Colonel Klink was to the Haulocaust"

Afghanistan and Iraq are collosal failures that will never fully recover.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kestra
Pyro, don't apologize for being passionate. That's a good thing.

While I believe Kerry is no angel, I'd vote for him way before I'd vote for Bush.
War is never pretty, so I'm told.....and nobody escapes it unscathed.

Bush has done a lousy job on the war on terror.

I heard a great quote the other day:"Saddam Hussein was to 911, as Colonel Klink was to the Haulocaust"

Afghanistan and Iraq are collosal failures that will never fully recover.

---

You said a lot of... 'stuff'... but you didnt provide a why.

this interview can express things much better than I can:

http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/04/04/int04020.html

Regardless of any faults Bush may or may not possess, I'd vote for him over Kerry because I see Kerry as a worse president for the following reason: Kerry gives me the impression he's just a a puppet. Bush, on the other hand, seems like the kind of guy that makes his own decisions about things. In a person that should be at the top, I want the latter. Particular issues are secondary for me.

John Kerry will say anything to get elected. Anything.

He has more positions on any given issue than the rest of the Senate combined. While I realize a politician's words aren't exactly the stuff of integrity, this man takes that to a bizarre extreme. No matter what he says, he doesn't mean it.

At least Bush tells the truth sometimes. I fear that the truth would burn Kerry's tongue out of his head.

There's a reason they have parody songs out that sing the praises of John Kerry's Waffle House... "serving waffles since 1984". How many times has he changed his position on issues? How can you possibly know what he'd stand for or do?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kestra

I heard a great quote the other day:"Saddam Hussein was to 911, as Colonel Klink was to the Haulocaust"

Afghanistan and Iraq are collosal failures that will never fully recover.

---

Well now we know you listen to Jeneane Garofalo (I can't be bothered to look up the correct spelling of this idiot's name... She's the moron who said there would be millions killed in the war portion of the liberation of Iraq, said she would apologize if she was wrong, but refuses to do so).

Afghanistan and Iraq are collosal successes.

Two repressive dictatorsships have been eliminated. That is success, not failure.

I love how people whine about handfuls of people dying now but didn't care about hundreds of thousands being MURDERED when those regimes were in place.

I could never vote for John Kerry because he wants to raise taxes. The government already takes enough of the people's money. It does not need more.

I care about foreign policy, but I care a lot more about my own family and the families of other hard working Americans.

Never forget that when he says "tax cuts for the rich" he defines rich as any FAMILY whose combined income is over $40,000 a year.

I miss the 80's when Saddam was our friend.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Speaking of waffling, Bush said he wouldn't use 911 in his political re-election campaign. He did.
He said before his "election" that he wasn't interested in nation building. That's clearly false.

Did you catch Rumsfeld on one of his latest appearances on "Meet the Press"? He kept saying over and over that he never used the words "immenant threat"
Then one of the co-hosts gave Rummy an exact quote of him using those very words.
This is a guy who believes you shouldn't question the president, or the terrorists win. What an idiot!!
How is Iraq a success? The CPA doesn't even know who the hell they're going to turn power over to.
Afghanistan is nothing to brag about.

Regarding those millions who died while Hussein was in power....don't forget Ronald Reagan and Bush Sr. were very aware of his treatment of Kurds in the north and other discenting voices. They denounced the attrocities publicly, but it was still business as usual with Iraq.

Also, isn't it fascination how all this former Bush administration members and government officials have gotten Bush Co. so wrong with their tell-tale books??
Everyone's wrong but the White House.

If you're not appauled and furious at this administration, then you're not paying close enough attention.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kestra
If you're not appauled and furious at this administration, then you're not paying close enough attention.

---

That is an utterly asinine statement. Everyone replying to this and many other threads about issues relating to the current situations in Iraq, Afghanistan, or the election this year are all obviously paying attention. Just because someone disagrees with your opinions doesn't mean that they aren't informed.

All I can say is, this is going to be an even worse election than the last one.

My political philosophies tend to lean a bit more democrat than republican, but even with that, I don't like John Kerry the politician much, for these and other reasons. But I definitely don't like George W. the politician much at all either.

Both sides have their camps, their toe-the-line slogans, and a huge lack of down-to-earth honesty. Nothing more than petty politics by petty politicians.

I suppose I could wish there were less politicians in American politics, but then again, I suppose I could wish there were less Catholics in the Vatican City, too.

sigh.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotle


I would love to hear John Kerry defend his votes against these programs. He might even have a good reason for it. Unfortunately, whenever he is asked about these votes he says the questioner is "attacking his patriotism" or "attacking his record in Viet Nam."

I wish he would just defend his votes. If he has a good reason, lets hear it. I wish he would stop pretending that asking him about votes he made in the US Senate equals attacking his service in Viet Nam.

---

The republican party has been spreading this stuff for a long time.

There was a bill that had money for numerous weapons.
When the bill came across the floor, it had like 9 billion dollars of pork. The bill was rejected by the congress as a whole and many republicans voted against it. When the bill was resubmitted Kerry voted for it.

The spin that has been put on this is that A) he voted against those things when in reality he voted against pork and B) he flip flops on these things when in reality he held steady in his stance against pork.

This is what happens when the media deals with half-truths and spins and don't do any real investigation into the votes and also make it sound like he cast 15 individual votes to turn down 15 things when it was just one vote.

No, actually THESE are assinine statements:

"So thank you for reminding me about the importance of being a good mom and a great volunteer as well." —George W. Bush, St. Louis, Mos., Jan. 5, 2004

"The ambassador and the general were briefing me on the — the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Oct. 27, 2003

"See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction." —George W. Bush, Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003

"We had a chance to visit with Teresa Nelson who's a parent, and a mom or a dad." —George W. Bush, Jacksonville, Florida, Sept. 9, 2003

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Elidia
There's a reason they have parody songs out that sing the praises of John Kerry's Waffle House... "serving waffles since 1984". How many times has he changed his position on issues? How can you possibly know what he'd stand for or do?

---

Can you name 3 things he has waffled on?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kestra
No, actually THESE are assinine statements:

"So thank you for reminding me about the importance of being a good mom and a great volunteer as well." —George W. Bush, St. Louis, Mos., Jan. 5, 2004

---

===> Wow!! So you think it's not important to be a good mom or dad? I dont think it's an assinine statement to say that it is important to be a good mom or dad.

Quote:

---

"The ambassador and the general were briefing me on the — the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Oct. 27, 2003

---

How is this stupid? I think it's true that the vast majority of Iraqis do not want to be at war, I do not think they want to be watching their children die everyday. I think like most human beings they want to be able to sit at home, worry about their own lives, perhaps for once worry about what to cook for dinner out of a plethora of choices rather than having to worry about a bomb exploding through the roof of their home. I hardly think it's assinine to bring people to justice that have went out of their way to plan horrific attacks such as 9/11, Madrid, etc. Or those that threaten to do acts like that - such as Saddam promising significant money to those that suicided on Israel.

Quote:

---

"See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction." —George W. Bush, Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003

---

You arent a fan of history are you? When, who, where, were the last democracies that went to war with each other? Hmm?

Quote:

---

"We had a chance to visit with Teresa Nelson who's a parent, and a mom or a dad." —George W. Bush, Jacksonville, Florida, Sept. 9, 2003

---

I actually dont know the context of this last one, but Im assuming that he's making reference to the mother of a fallen soldier.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sebboe
Can you name 3 things he has waffled on?

---

1- War on Terror
2- War in Iraq
3- Military Funding
4- Military Background
5- Tax cuts
6- Tax increases
7- Medicare/Social Security removal
8- Decrease in crime prevention funding


Sorry, went 5 over.

If you can explain to me how Bush can be a better mother, I'd like to hear it.
you need to read your second re-post a bit more closely.
"the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice."
--He's going to bring those Iraqis who want a free world to justice? That was the quote.

Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction."
--uuhhh....right!!

These quotes show how inept Bush is without a television prompter or a prepared speech.

Quote:

---

Kestra babbled:

Speaking of waffling, Bush said he wouldn't use 911 in his political re-election campaign. He did.

---

First, is campaign strategy a political stance? No. The analogy doesn't hold.

Second, where is your citation of Bush saying no campaign ad would contain any mention or reference to 9/11? No such claim was made because it would be impossible to ignore the single most important event of his entire presidency.

Quote:

---

Kestra dribbled:

He said before his "election" that he wasn't interested in nation building. That's clearly false.

---

Hello....... MacFly........ Before the election the US had never been the victim of foreign terrorism on our soil. When 3,000+ people got murdered that changed everything, didn't it?

Quote:

---

Kestra drooled:

How is Iraq a success? The CPA doesn't even know who the hell they're going to turn power over to.
Afghanistan is nothing to brag about.

---

Do you EVER provide any evidence to back up anything you say?

Women are now allowed to learn to read, drive, get a job, and speak in Afghanistan. That is nothing to brag about? I think that is most definitely something to brag about.

If you made your post to this board in Afghanistan under the Taliban, you would have been beaten, tortured, raped, and most likely killed.

Millions of Iraqis are not being deliberately murdered because their political opinion differs from a dictator. That is not an improvement?

Humanitarian aid sent to Iraq from other countries actually goes to feed the people of Iraq rather than being used to build more palaces for Hussein.

Something does not have to be perfect in order to be deemed improved.

Quote:

---

Kestra sputtered:

Regarding those millions who died while Hussein was in power....don't forget Ronald Reagan and Bush Sr. were very aware of his treatment of Kurds in the north and other discenting voices. They denounced the attrocities publicly, but it was still business as usual with Iraq.

---

Aha. So it was wrong of us not to overthrow Iraq in the 1980s while at the same time it is wrong of us that we did overthrow Saddam in 2003.

Do you even realize how absurd you sound?

Can you even comprehend how different things were in the 1980s than they are now?

Quote:

---

Kestra gurgled:

If you're not appauled and furious at this administration, then you're not paying close enough attention.

---

You really need to educate yourself beyond the new left wing talk radio network and comedians who pose as political experts.

You cannot cite facts. You make sweeping generalizations without backing them up. You contradict yourself with ridiculous frequency.

If you want your opinions to be taken seriously, you need read a few dozen books on the history of the past 100 years or so and start reading newspapers and news periodicals. Try a few news shows (radio or tv) that aren't on CNN, NPR, or the new liberal left wing network (Al Franken, Garrafolo, et. al.).

As for being "appauled" [sic], what appalls me is people who think it is acceptable to steal from every hard working American in the country. That's John Kerry.

Stealing from Americans will always be more important to me than the vagaries of complex foreign policy.

The ultimate irony of all this is that even if John Kerry were elected, our foreign policy would hardly change. Most foreign policy decisions are not as flexible as people think they are.

I am glad that we have incredibly diverse political, social, and economic opinions on this forum. I respect anyone who expresses their opinions from a position of intelligence and understanding. I am disgusted when people take strong stances without making an effort to educate themselves first. It is completely repugnant when people do nothing but spew quotes from a political pamphlet, extremist web site, or political demagogue.

Furthermore, it is absolutely disgraceful for you to accuse people of "not paying attention" when your understanding of politics and knowledge of history is absolutely abysmal.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Frobozz
1- War on Terror
2- War in Iraq
3- Military Funding
4- Military Background
5- Tax cuts
6- Tax increases
7- Medicare/Social Security removal
8- Decrease in crime prevention funding


Sorry, went 5 over.

---

Can you site sources of votes or speeches that he had that contradict themselves or are you just going along with what you heard from the republican campaing machine?

Item 2, as he stated in the debates was something he voted for because Bush said he needed to get it passed so he could work with the UN but he never really spent any time with the UN. Powell went to the UN and said "Sadam has WoMD" and the UN said "Proof?" Then the US attacked and that was when Kerry said he didn't support it. He wanted a UN based resolution, which if had happened, there would be a UN based set of troops there instead of 98% US troops.

I think this is what you are talking about in item 1 but you didn't give specifics.

Item 3 I already posted about how the republican propaganda machine has taken great liberties to take 2 different votes he cast and accuse him of being against military investment and waffling all at onece.

Item 4. Please clarify.

Items 5 & 6. I don't have the voting records but tax cuts and tax increases are something that one is going to vote differently on from year to year based on the economy, the needs of the people and most importantly the content of the bill you are voting on.

Items 7 and 8. Off the top of my head I have no information on this without doing research but again I wouldn't be surprised if he rejected bills that said A, B and C and said, I can't vote for C, its just wrong but when the bill came back with just A and B he said ok.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotle



Hello....... MacFly........ Before the election the US had never been the victim of foreign terrorism on our soil. When 3,000+ people got murdered that changed everything, didn't it?



Do you EVER provide any evidence to back up anything you say?

---

Just two quick points here.

Terrorists made an attempt at blowing up the world trade center with the van in the garage, so the first statement is just not true.

As far as your second quote, I'd like to point out that you started this thread with a list of things Kerry voted against but cited no facts.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sebboe
Just two quick points here.

Terrorists made an attempt at blowing up the world trade center with the van in the garage, so the first statement is just not true.

---

That was a failed attempt. Nice of you to nitpick an irrelevant detail that had nothing to do with the point that was made.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sebboe
As far as your second quote, I'd like to point out that you started this thread with a list of things Kerry voted against but cited no facts.

---

The list WAS the facts. Sheesh. I looked up his voting record. This is public record.