The W
Views: 98304976
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
20.8.07 1348
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Kerry and other leaders Register and log in to post!
(1028 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (14 total)
wmatistic
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 42/2170
EXP: 6273926
For next: 118873

Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#1 Posted on 16.3.04 1112.16
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1115.15
Damned if Kerry isn't doing things that make you wonder what he was thinking at the time.

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Tuesday said that his Democratic rival, Sen. John Kerry, should "back up" his claim that a number of world leaders want a new U.S. president.

"I think if you're gonna make an accusation in the course of a presidential campaign, you out to back it up with facts," Bush said Tuesday during a news conference with the Netherlands' Prime Minister, Jan Peter Balkenende. (Full story)

Bush made his statement when asked by reporters about a comment Sen. John Kerry made to supporters March 8 at a fund-raiser in Florida: "I've met more leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but boy, they look at you and say, 'You got to win this. You got to beat this guy.' "

A chorus of administration officials have criticized Kerry for the remark and are demanding he name names.

"At the very least, we have a right to know what he is saying to foreign leaders that makes them so supportive of his candidacy," Vice President Dick Cheney said at a Republican fund-raiser in Arizona.

"Senator Kerry has a choice here. He either comes clean with these sources, or it's very clear that the fact of it is that he's making it up," said Dan Bartlett, the White House communications director, in an interview with CNN's John King.

Kerry dismissed the challenges Monday, telling reporters that administration officials were trying to divert attention from President Bush's record.

Kerry campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said Bush "has squandered the goodwill of 99 percent of the world in just two short years."

"After September 11th, the world was behind us," Cutter said. "Today, George Bush's go-it-alone foreign policies have not made America safer and left our soldiers in a shooting gallery in Iraq."

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan on Monday urged Kerry to "be straightforward" with American voters and disclose which international leaders told him they support him.

If he won't, "Then the only alternative is that he is making it up to attack the president of the United States," McClellan said.

Cutter shot back that if McClellan was going to take on campaign issues, Bush "ought to get him off the taxpayers' payroll and stop using the White House for political purposes."

"The bottom line is this White House would be better off spending its time repairing our alliances around the world so we can collectively fight the war on terrorism and better protect the United States, rather than using the White House press room as a place to carry out political attacks," she said in a written statement. (CNN.com Special Report: America Votes 2004)

Secretary of State Colin Powell joined the fray over the weekend.

"I don't know what foreign leaders Senator Kerry is talking about," he told "Fox News Sunday."

"It's an easy charge, an easy assertion to make. But if he feels it is that important an assertion to make, he ought to list some names. If he can't list names, then perhaps he should find something else to talk about."

Asked about the comments, Kerry, a four-term senator from Massachusetts, told reporters Monday the president's allies were trying to divert attention from Bush's record.

"They want to change the subject from jobs, health care, environment, Social Security," he said. "They don't have a campaign, so they're trying to divert it."

Kerry told a Bush supporter at a Pennsylvania jobs forum Sunday that the leaders who made the comments were speaking to him in confidence and are currently engaged in work with the Bush administration.

While declining to name names, Kerry said Sunday that he has had conversations with world leaders over the last two years and also has friends who have met with concerned leaders as recently as a week ago. He described the leaders as "allies" and "friends" of the United States who have been alienated by the Bush administration.

"I have heard from people who are leaders elsewhere in the world who don't appreciate the Bush administration approach and would love to see a change in the leadership of the United States," he said."


I think my problem here was when Kerry was pressed by a reporter to give more info he tried to turn it into the guy being being a Bush backer and thus the question didn't matter. Now he's trying to say the Republicans are only questioning this because they want to divert us from the real issues. Well YOU brought it up and now you're trying to move away from it!

If these leaders are so supportive of Kerry then why wouldn't they say so publically? It's not like other leaders have been quiet about not liking Bush. So why do so here?

I don't hate Kerry, but I do think he has to avoid saying things like this that open him up to questions and then respond by trying to change the subject. He was clearly using this "fact" as a way to sway voters to his side. But if he can't back it up, then he really shouldn't have gone there.

It was a mistake. I don't think he should be forced to name names, but he should have known better than to even bring it up in the first place.
Promote this thread!
Maniac
Linguica
Level: 19

Posts: 16/66
EXP: 33169
For next: 2608

Since: 27.2.04
From: New England

Since last post: 1083 days
Last activity: 113 days
AIM:  
#2 Posted on 16.3.04 1218.30
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1218.30

wmatistic: I think my problem here was when Kerry was pressed by a reporter to give more info he tried to turn it into the guy being being a Bush backer and thus the question didn't matter. Now he's trying to say the Republicans are only questioning this because they want to divert us from the real issues. Well YOU brought it up and now you're trying to move away from it!

If these leaders are so supportive of Kerry then why wouldn't they say so publicly? It's not like other leaders have been quiet about not liking Bush. So why do so here?

I don't hate Kerry, but I do think he has to avoid saying things like this that open him up to questions and then respond by trying to change the subject. He was clearly using this "fact" as a way to sway voters to his side. But if he can't back it up, then he really shouldn't have gone there.

It was a mistake. I don't think he should be forced to name names, but he should have known better than to even bring it up in the first place.
____________________________________________________________

I think you are right he made a mistake by mentioning the calls. He could be the next President of United States and I think he did get phone calls from other Countries Leaders, they have to show support just in case he wins, but he handled it wrong. He should have made a joke of it, maybe "GW is waiting by the phone as we speak for the same calls of support he received 4 years ago. I'm told the White House is reportedly having phone problems, it's the phones that's have the problem." Anything would have been better than the way he reacted.

Republicans seriously want Kerry to name names. This is going to be a great election, with lots of stupid stuff from both sides.

The Republicans are way to defensive and the President needs to lighten up, I think Kerry can use this against them.

"I think if you're gonna make an accusation in the course of a presidential campaign, you out to back it up with facts," Bush said

"At the very least, we have a right to know what he is saying to foreign leaders that makes them so supportive of his candidacy," Vice President Dick Cheney

"Senator Kerry has a choice here. He either comes clean with these sources, or it's very clear that the fact of it is that he's making it up," said Dan Bartlett

What is wrong with these guys they forgot about the calls they received 4 years ago.
wmatistic
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 43/2170
EXP: 6273926
For next: 118873

Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#3 Posted on 16.3.04 1232.18
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1234.09
Well a phone call would be one thing, but his statement says it was more than that...

"I've met more leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but boy, they look at you and say, 'You got to win this. You got to beat this guy.' "

They look at you...well that says he's been meeting in person with "leaders". When and who would be the natural question anyone, whether they support Kerry or not, would ask.

And why can't they go out and say this? There have been several leaders in the world who have had no problem saying they are against Bush. So what makes these different?

DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 567/2697
EXP: 8824121
For next: 164698

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#4 Posted on 16.3.04 1337.22
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1337.39
Do other world leaders want Bush out? Sure. Are they dumb enough to say so in public? No. Is Kerry an idiot here? Yes. And "W" should ignore it. Would I be happy with two other choices in the fall? YES!

(edited by DrDirt on 16.3.04 1337)
Maniac
Linguica
Level: 19

Posts: 18/66
EXP: 33169
For next: 2608

Since: 27.2.04
From: New England

Since last post: 1083 days
Last activity: 113 days
AIM:  
#5 Posted on 16.3.04 1607.35
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1607.47
"I've met more leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but boy, they look at you and say, 'You got to win this. You got to beat this guy."

He is a Senator and meets allot of World leaders. You know that people will say one thing to your face, something else behind your back and another thing totally different to someone who can help them. The two faces of politics.

I don't think it's up to him to say who it was. It's up to the people who said it, support him and want Bush out. They really want to know Who? Why do they want to know? If Kerry is lying they win? The Republicans are playing with fire on this one. If these supporters come forward now and they turn out to be respected influential people Bush is sunk.
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 569/2697
EXP: 8824121
For next: 164698

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#6 Posted on 16.3.04 1610.50
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1611.47
Respected world leaders aren't going to come out and say anything. Politics, diplomacy, and the way the game is played dictate otherwise. If Kerry keeps this up, he is the one playing with fire, not "W". To his credit, Kerry is smart enpugh not to pony up any names.
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 3490/7534
EXP: 43427514
For next: 874248

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 415 days
Last activity: 415 days
#7 Posted on 16.3.04 1644.26
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1645.23
Kerry has been on the campaign trail for most of the past year and has missed many Senate votes. When exactly has he had time to go meet with these foreign leaders? And, is he holding these meetings while he is missing votes?
I agree with Dr. Dirt, is he probably right: yes. But, I'm trying to understand the campaign strategy of 'I'm the one the foreigners want.' I can already see the ad by the RNC of Kerry superimposed with Chirac with a French flag behind them. In a close race, jingoism has a better chance of winning.
ScreamingHeadGuy
Frankfurter
Level: 56

Posts: 488/743
EXP: 1371046
For next: 27139

Since: 1.2.02
From: Appleton, WI

Since last post: 685 days
Last activity: 685 days
#8 Posted on 16.3.04 1719.58
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1722.43
I'm actually pretty indignant as to the whole scenario. I mean, the whole notion of foreign leaders getting involved in internal matters of the United States (a presidential election, no less) just makes me angry.

For Kerry to claim he's in talks with (and gaining support from - even if only moral) these foreign leaders just give me another reason to vote against him. (And couldn't it be considered collusion to oust the current government?)
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 108

Posts: 718/3352
EXP: 13143721
For next: 376822

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#9 Posted on 16.3.04 1826.48
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1827.41
    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    Kerry has been on the campaign trail for most of the past year and has missed many Senate votes.



as a matter of fact, that's certainly true, I was gonna Blog on his vote swapping over the past 5 years or so, but it's a difficult search engine - but what I kept getting was "not voting". He was there on March 9th though. I think that's when they had the rejection of the tax cuts thing. I guess they needed his vote and pulled him in.
Maniac
Linguica
Level: 19

Posts: 19/66
EXP: 33169
For next: 2608

Since: 27.2.04
From: New England

Since last post: 1083 days
Last activity: 113 days
AIM:  
#10 Posted on 16.3.04 1930.37
Reposted on: 16.3.11 1931.54
It could also be John Kerry's way of saying George Bush has a bad foreign policy.
Big Bad
Scrapple
Level: 145

Posts: 2889/6718
EXP: 37392244
For next: 211928

Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 10 hours
#11 Posted on 16.3.04 2344.25
Reposted on: 16.3.11 2346.08

    I'm actually pretty indignant as to the whole scenario. I mean, the whole notion of foreign leaders getting involved in internal matters of the United States (a presidential election, no less) just makes me angry.


Yes, because the USA has never, ever interfered in the politics of another country before.
brick
Bockwurst
Level: 49

Posts: 265/535
EXP: 839121
For next: 44768

Since: 17.1.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 475 days
Last activity: 471 days
#12 Posted on 17.3.04 0847.31
Reposted on: 17.3.11 0848.22
    Originally posted by ScreamingHeadGuy
    I'm actually pretty indignant as to the whole scenario. I mean, the whole notion of foreign leaders getting involved in internal matters of the United States (a presidential election, no less) just makes me angry.

    For Kerry to claim he's in talks with (and gaining support from - even if only moral) these foreign leaders just give me another reason to vote against him. (And couldn't it be considered collusion to oust the current government?)


Senators and Congressmen talk with foreign dignitaries all the time. Remember its the House and Senate who pass the legislation for trade agreements, Aid and such. Just because the president is commander in chief does not make him the only person in our government that foreign politicians need to talk to.
I personally don't think that Kerry should have said it if he didn't have anyone who was willing to step up and say yes I said that I would prefer Kerry to Bush. However, it is very unlikely that any dignitary would come out and say that. Coming out and supporting the losing side could hurt you down the line when negotiating with the winner.
Now when are these two going to start addressing issues that matter rather than ripping apart sound bites. Thats my real issue with this campaign up till now.
adamzak
Chaurice
Level: 5

Posts: 1/3
EXP: 320
For next: 209

Since: 17.3.04
From: London, UK

Since last post: 3799 days
Last activity: 3782 days
#13 Posted on 17.3.04 1243.42
Reposted on: 17.3.11 1244.09
Well, I hardly think Kerry is an "idiot" for making the statement. He may have been careless, but not idiotic.

In most countries there is not a unified front amoung its politicians about any subject, let alone one as divisive as American Foreign Policy under this administration. Is it really that unbelievable that some UK Labour politicians would want to see Kerry elected? Is it really so unbelievable to think that Labor party members in Israel would support a democrat over a Republican? Or opposition politicians in Italy and Spain where the majority of people did not support their government taking part in Iraq?

Living abroad, the foreign press is full anti-Bush articles, and polls show that most people in most western democracies don't support Bush's policies. I know that Bush and co. are trying to paint Kerry as someone who "makes things up", (and they're doing a good job defining him by the comments on this board), but I'm a little surprised they are doing so on this issue which only reinforces the perceptions that 1) Bush's foreign policy alienates most of our allies; and 2) Bush and co' have been "making it up" on many issues (wmd, prescription drug costs, tax cuts = job creation).
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 572/2697
EXP: 8824121
For next: 164698

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#14 Posted on 17.3.04 1321.20
Reposted on: 17.3.11 1321.21
    Originally posted by adamzak
    Well, I hardly think Kerry is an "idiot" for making the statement. He may have been careless, but not idiotic.

    In most countries there is not a unified front amoung its politicians about any subject, let alone one as divisive as American Foreign Policy under this administration. Is it really that unbelievable that some UK Labour politicians would want to see Kerry elected? Is it really so unbelievable to think that Labor party members in Israel would support a democrat over a Republican? Or opposition politicians in Italy and Spain where the majority of people did not support their government taking part in Iraq?

    Living abroad, the foreign press is full anti-Bush articles, and polls show that most people in most western democracies don't support Bush's policies. I know that Bush and co. are trying to paint Kerry as someone who "makes things up", (and they're doing a good job defining him by the comments on this board), but I'm a little surprised they are doing so on this issue which only reinforces the perceptions that 1) Bush's foreign policy alienates most of our allies; and 2) Bush and co' have been "making it up" on many issues (wmd, prescription drug costs, tax cuts = job creation).


The inference is heads of state, not opposition leaders or back benchers. Countries certainly have interests in who leads other countries and that is fine. They will do things quietly to influence outcomes. However, Kerry is out of bounds here and should have kept his mouth shut. If you agree that we are at war, then we may disagree over the direction of said conflict and battle during an election, but Kerry crossed a line that I as a liberal Democrat think shouldn't be crossed.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: Testing the apathy of the nation
Next thread: Mount Lebanon Hotel Bombing
Previous thread: Spanish bombs may be Al-Qaeda's work
(1028 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Kerry and other leadersRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.204 seconds.