Kerry flip-flops on Iraq and says WMD do not matter

[Rudey]

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=5926563

The Bush campaign has been pressuring Kerry to say whether he would have still voted for the Iraq war given the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found. Kerry on Monday said he would have voted to give the president authorization to use force against Iraq "but I would have used that authority effectively."

Bush and his aides delighted in the response and said it showed further evidence of Kerry flip-flopping from an anti-war stance he held during the Democratic primary last winter.

"Now, almost two years after he voted for the war in Iraq, and almost 220 days after switching positions to declare himself the anti-war candidate, my opponent has found a new nuance," Bush said. "He now agrees it was the right decision to go into Iraq."

"After months of questioning my motives, and even my credibility, Senator Kerry now agrees with me that even though we have not found the stockpiles of weapons we all believed were there, knowing everything we know today, he would have voted to go into Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein from power. I want to thank Senator Kerry for clearing that up," Bush said.

-Rudey

[Kevin]

Good.

The last time I heard he was asked this question, I had heard his reply was "maybe".

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

I don't see a flip-flop here, his position is how it has been for over a year:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040810/D84CJ5MG0.html

In October 2002, Kerry voted to give Bush the military authority to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein - a vote he said Monday that he stands by despite the failure to find weapons of mass destruction. But the four-term Massachusetts senator added that Bush used the authority poorly, rushing to war with limited allied support and little thought to an end game.

Kerry's national security adviser, Rand Beers, said Tuesday that "the issue has never been whether we were right to hold Saddam accountable, the issue is that we went to war without our allies, without properly equipping our troops and without a plan to win the peace."

[Rudey]

Really and what was his position a year ago??

-Rudey

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
I don't see a flip-flop here, his position is how it has been for over a year:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040810/D84CJ5MG0.html

In October 2002, Kerry voted to give Bush the military authority to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein - a vote he said Monday that he stands by despite the failure to find weapons of mass destruction. But the four-term Massachusetts senator added that Bush used the authority poorly, rushing to war with limited allied support and little thought to an end game.

Kerry's national security adviser, Rand Beers, said Tuesday that "the issue has never been whether we were right to hold Saddam accountable, the issue is that we went to war without our allies, without properly equipping our troops and without a plan to win the peace."

[Love_Spell_6]

Originally posted by Rudey
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=5926563

The Bush campaign has been pressuring Kerry to say whether he would have still voted for the Iraq war given the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found. Kerry on Monday said he would have voted to give the president authorization to use force against Iraq "but I would have used that authority effectively."

I don't see the point of pressuring Kerry to say anything. Its obvious he lies or flip-flops often...and the folks that are voting for him...or against Bush...know this too...so what's the point?

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Rudey
Really and what was his position a year ago??

-Rudey

CNN) -- Democratic front-runner Sen. John Kerry took issue Thursday night with a top Republican who earlier in the day questioned his credentials to be president.

While debating his six rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination in Greenville, South Carolina, Kerry said President Bush broke his promise that he would "build a legitimate global coalition" and go to war only "as a last resort."

"He did not go to war as a last resort, and I think he fails the test of the commander in chief," said Kerry, a decorated Navy veteran of the Vietnam War.

"I intend to hold him accountable in this election, because the American people's pockets are being picked to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, and our troops are at greater risk than they needed to be," said the senator from Massachusetts.

"And we deserve leadership that knows how to take a nation to war if you have to."

Earlier in the day, Ed Gillespie, chairman of the Republican National Committee, questioned Kerry's ability to lead the nation in the post-September 11 era. (Full story)

While calling Kerry's service in the military "honorable," Gillespie faulted Kerry's voting record in the Senate, where he is serving in his fourth term.

"His long record in the Senate is one of advocating policies that would weaken our national security," Gillespie said.

Kerry, along with Sens. John Edwards of North Carolina and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, voted to support the war in Iraq. Edwards says his vote was based on intelligence information and that an independent commission should be formed to determine if that information was credible.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ain/index.html

**********

[Rudey]

So he's saying he voted to go to war but that Bush was wrong to go to war. He is saying WMD don't matter but they do matter. He is saying he has no position. Kerry the great straddler and flip-flopper.

-Rudey

Originally posted by ktsnake
CNN) -- Democratic front-runner Sen. John Kerry took issue Thursday night with a top Republican who earlier in the day questioned his credentials to be president.

While debating his six rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination in Greenville, South Carolina, Kerry said President Bush broke his promise that he would "build a legitimate global coalition" and go to war only "as a last resort."

"He did not go to war as a last resort, and I think he fails the test of the commander in chief," said Kerry, a decorated Navy veteran of the Vietnam War.

"I intend to hold him accountable in this election, because the American people's pockets are being picked to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, and our troops are at greater risk than they needed to be," said the senator from Massachusetts.

"And we deserve leadership that knows how to take a nation to war if you have to."

Earlier in the day, Ed Gillespie, chairman of the Republican National Committee, questioned Kerry's ability to lead the nation in the post-September 11 era. (Full story)

While calling Kerry's service in the military "honorable," Gillespie faulted Kerry's voting record in the Senate, where he is serving in his fourth term.

"His long record in the Senate is one of advocating policies that would weaken our national security," Gillespie said.

Kerry, along with Sens. John Edwards of North Carolina and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, voted to support the war in Iraq. Edwards says his vote was based on intelligence information and that an independent commission should be formed to determine if that information was credible.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ain/index.html

**********

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Rudey
So he's saying he voted to go to war but that Bush was wrong to go to war. He is saying WMD don't matter but they do matter. He is saying he has no position. Kerry the great straddler and flip-flopper.

-Rudey

I'd have to agree with that.