Plus now we know a lot more about him. The last time when he couldnt answer something or said something stupid, he got a pass because he was thought to be an everyday man, "one of us" so to speak.
BUT when this time around he makes a fool of himself and says stupid things, the Dems will pounce on them and will be replayed for a long time
BUT when this time around he makes a fool of himself and says stupid things, the Dems will pounce on them and will be replayed for a long time
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GAMEFACE:
LMFAO!
WTF will Kerry say about 20 years in the Senate supporting the gutting of the CIA And FBI, voting against every military weapon, unfuking believable. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why is a war president in such a election battle ?
I thought things were going so well ?
What a joke this guy is.
Jobs Jobs and more Jobs will decide this election.
Both these guys were weak on the CIA. Bush will not mention the CIA or FBI in the debates if he does he is screwed. The big boss was watching over the CIA and cherry picked info from the CIA reports. By the way wasn't the FBI given a clean bill of health in the 911 tragedy.
******************************************
Summary
The Bush campaign accused Kerry of "a pattern" of trying to cut intelligence funding. Bush personally accused Kerry of attempting to "gut the intelligence services" with a "deeply irresponsible" 1995 proposal.
It's true that Kerry proposed cuts in 1994 and 1995, and the his 1994 proposal was criticized on the Senate floor by some members of his own party. But the proposal Bush criticized would have amounted to a reduction of roughly 1%. And senior congressional Republicans supported a cut two-thirds as large at the time.
Analysis
President Bush said March 8 at a political fundraiser in Dallas that Kerry's 1995 proposal to cut $1.5 billion over five years was "deeply irresponsible."
His bill was so deeply irresponsible that he didn't have a single co-sponsor in the United States Senate. Once again, Senator Kerry is trying to have it both ways. He's for good intelligence, yet he was willing to gut the intelligence services. And that is no way to lead a nation in a time of war.
"Gut" intelligence? It was 1%
It's true that Kerry's 1995 proposal called for cutting intelligence funding by $1.5 billion over five years. The actual amount of intelligence spending is classified, but according to the Boston Globe, the Washington Post and others, the US was spending roughly $27 billion on intelligence at the time. So the $300-million cut would have amounted to a little over 1 percent. Hardly a "gutting."
It's true Kerry's measure had no co-sponsors and died without a hearing. But that's hardly evidence it was "deeply irresponsible" as the President claimed. On the contrary, there was bipartisan support for cutting what was seen as wasteful spending of classified intelligence funds.
In fact, Kerry's proposal came five days after the Washington Post had reported that one intelligence agency, the super-secret National Reconnaissance Office, had quietly hoarded between $1 billion and $1.7 billion in unspent funds without informing the Central Intelligence Agency or the Pentagon. The CIA was in the midst of an inquiry into the NRO's funding because of complaints that the agency had spent $300 million on unspent funds from its classified budget to build a new headquarters building in Virginia a year earlier.
"Irresponsible?" But Republicans Approved.
Also, the very same day Kerry proposed his $1.5 billion cut, the Senate passed by voice vote an amendment proposed by Republican Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania to eliminate $1 billion in intelligence funds for fiscal year 1996. Specter made clear he was attempting to recoup $1 billion in unused intelligence funds from the NRO:
It has alleged that the NRO has accumulated more than $1 billion in unspent funds without informing the Pentagon, CIA, or Congress.
Kerry co-sponsored a companion measure to the Specter amendment, along with Republican Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama. The cut eventually became law as part of a House-Senate package endorsed by the Republican leadership.
And in fact, the reports of an NRO slush fund turned out to be true. According to former CIA general counsel Jeffrey Smith, who led the investigation:
Our inquiry revealed that the NRO had for years accumulated very substantial amount as a 'rainy day fund.'
Smith, quoted by Slate Magazine, said Kerry's proposal was an attempt "to re-assert adequate Congressional oversight of the intelligence budget."
A "pattern?" Well, not exactly
The Bush campaign in a March 9 document accused Kerry of "a pattern of intelligence cuts." But aside from the 1995 proposal, the only evidence of a "pattern" offered was a 1994 deficit-reduction bill Kerry sponsored (S. 1826) that included a $1 billion a year in cuts to the intelligence budget for 1994-1998.
It is true that some members of Kerry's own party criticized that proposal. Sen. Dennis DeConcini said intelligence funds already had been cut $3.5 billion:
I continue to believe that last year's intelligence cut was as deep as the intelligence community can withstand during its post-cold-war transition.
And Sen. Daniel Inouye echoed that:
An additional $1 billion would severely hamper the intelligence community's ability to provide decisionmakers and policymakers with information on matters vital to this country.
On Feb 10,1994, Kerry's amendment was defeated 75-20 with 38 Democratic Senators voting against it.
But it is also true that even at that time there was growing concern about the how effectively the intelligence agencies were spending the money they had. Later in 1994 Congress formed the Aspin Commission to assess the state of the intelligence services. It was bipartisan. Following the death of former Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, for whom the panel was named, it was headed by another former Secretary of Defense, Harold Brown, and by Republican former Sen. Warren Rudman of New Hampshire.
When the 17-member panel completed its report two years later, it said intelligence funding, despite recent cuts, was still 80% higher than it had been in 1980 even after adjustments for inflation. And while the commission did not recommend any more cuts, it acknowledged that balancing the federal budget would probably require that cuts be made.
And the commission stopped well short of claiming further cuts would "gut" the intelligence services:
Reductions to the existing and planned intelligence resources may be possible without damaging the nation's security. Indeed, finding such reductions is critical . . . (I)t is clear a more rigorous analysis of the resources budgeted for intelligence is required.
LMFAO!
WTF will Kerry say about 20 years in the Senate supporting the gutting of the CIA And FBI, voting against every military weapon, unfuking believable. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why is a war president in such a election battle ?
I thought things were going so well ?
What a joke this guy is.
Jobs Jobs and more Jobs will decide this election.
Both these guys were weak on the CIA. Bush will not mention the CIA or FBI in the debates if he does he is screwed. The big boss was watching over the CIA and cherry picked info from the CIA reports. By the way wasn't the FBI given a clean bill of health in the 911 tragedy.
******************************************
Summary
The Bush campaign accused Kerry of "a pattern" of trying to cut intelligence funding. Bush personally accused Kerry of attempting to "gut the intelligence services" with a "deeply irresponsible" 1995 proposal.
It's true that Kerry proposed cuts in 1994 and 1995, and the his 1994 proposal was criticized on the Senate floor by some members of his own party. But the proposal Bush criticized would have amounted to a reduction of roughly 1%. And senior congressional Republicans supported a cut two-thirds as large at the time.
Analysis
President Bush said March 8 at a political fundraiser in Dallas that Kerry's 1995 proposal to cut $1.5 billion over five years was "deeply irresponsible."
His bill was so deeply irresponsible that he didn't have a single co-sponsor in the United States Senate. Once again, Senator Kerry is trying to have it both ways. He's for good intelligence, yet he was willing to gut the intelligence services. And that is no way to lead a nation in a time of war.
"Gut" intelligence? It was 1%
It's true that Kerry's 1995 proposal called for cutting intelligence funding by $1.5 billion over five years. The actual amount of intelligence spending is classified, but according to the Boston Globe, the Washington Post and others, the US was spending roughly $27 billion on intelligence at the time. So the $300-million cut would have amounted to a little over 1 percent. Hardly a "gutting."
It's true Kerry's measure had no co-sponsors and died without a hearing. But that's hardly evidence it was "deeply irresponsible" as the President claimed. On the contrary, there was bipartisan support for cutting what was seen as wasteful spending of classified intelligence funds.
In fact, Kerry's proposal came five days after the Washington Post had reported that one intelligence agency, the super-secret National Reconnaissance Office, had quietly hoarded between $1 billion and $1.7 billion in unspent funds without informing the Central Intelligence Agency or the Pentagon. The CIA was in the midst of an inquiry into the NRO's funding because of complaints that the agency had spent $300 million on unspent funds from its classified budget to build a new headquarters building in Virginia a year earlier.
"Irresponsible?" But Republicans Approved.
Also, the very same day Kerry proposed his $1.5 billion cut, the Senate passed by voice vote an amendment proposed by Republican Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania to eliminate $1 billion in intelligence funds for fiscal year 1996. Specter made clear he was attempting to recoup $1 billion in unused intelligence funds from the NRO:
It has alleged that the NRO has accumulated more than $1 billion in unspent funds without informing the Pentagon, CIA, or Congress.
Kerry co-sponsored a companion measure to the Specter amendment, along with Republican Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama. The cut eventually became law as part of a House-Senate package endorsed by the Republican leadership.
And in fact, the reports of an NRO slush fund turned out to be true. According to former CIA general counsel Jeffrey Smith, who led the investigation:
Our inquiry revealed that the NRO had for years accumulated very substantial amount as a 'rainy day fund.'
Smith, quoted by Slate Magazine, said Kerry's proposal was an attempt "to re-assert adequate Congressional oversight of the intelligence budget."
A "pattern?" Well, not exactly
The Bush campaign in a March 9 document accused Kerry of "a pattern of intelligence cuts." But aside from the 1995 proposal, the only evidence of a "pattern" offered was a 1994 deficit-reduction bill Kerry sponsored (S. 1826) that included a $1 billion a year in cuts to the intelligence budget for 1994-1998.
It is true that some members of Kerry's own party criticized that proposal. Sen. Dennis DeConcini said intelligence funds already had been cut $3.5 billion:
I continue to believe that last year's intelligence cut was as deep as the intelligence community can withstand during its post-cold-war transition.
And Sen. Daniel Inouye echoed that:
An additional $1 billion would severely hamper the intelligence community's ability to provide decisionmakers and policymakers with information on matters vital to this country.
On Feb 10,1994, Kerry's amendment was defeated 75-20 with 38 Democratic Senators voting against it.
But it is also true that even at that time there was growing concern about the how effectively the intelligence agencies were spending the money they had. Later in 1994 Congress formed the Aspin Commission to assess the state of the intelligence services. It was bipartisan. Following the death of former Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, for whom the panel was named, it was headed by another former Secretary of Defense, Harold Brown, and by Republican former Sen. Warren Rudman of New Hampshire.
When the 17-member panel completed its report two years later, it said intelligence funding, despite recent cuts, was still 80% higher than it had been in 1980 even after adjustments for inflation. And while the commission did not recommend any more cuts, it acknowledged that balancing the federal budget would probably require that cuts be made.
And the commission stopped well short of claiming further cuts would "gut" the intelligence services:
Reductions to the existing and planned intelligence resources may be possible without damaging the nation's security. Indeed, finding such reductions is critical . . . (I)t is clear a more rigorous analysis of the resources budgeted for intelligence is required.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bulldog77:
Codework:
What presidential duties would Dubya miss? Some one else will have to read to the kids that day. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Bull
True maybe he can get the Whitehouse spokesman to do the debate
LOL
Codework:
What presidential duties would Dubya miss? Some one else will have to read to the kids that day. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Bull
True maybe he can get the Whitehouse spokesman to do the debate
LOL
Kerry voted for the war.
Kerry voted against funding the war.
Kerry said we were mislead...he was on the intelligence committee.
He has ties to Joe Wilson (Wheres waldo Now)
Kerry has voted for every tax increase known to man kind.
Kerry has voted against every tax deduction there ever was.
Kerry voted for 16 free trade agreements including NAFTA. (bye bye jobs)
Kerry voted for unilateral disarmement.(hello cold war)
Kerry voted against the 1st gulf war.
Kerry spent a winter in vietnam
Kerry threw away his medals...Obviousley someone threw them back.
Kerry spoke 20 minutes on the flag during convention.
Kerry voted 4 times in favor of burning the flag.
This stuff off the top of my head...never mind what Carl Rove has in store...bwa..bwa.bwa..aahaha...ahaha...AHAHA...AHAHAHAHA!!!
Kerry voted against funding the war.
Kerry said we were mislead...he was on the intelligence committee.
He has ties to Joe Wilson (Wheres waldo Now)
Kerry has voted for every tax increase known to man kind.
Kerry has voted against every tax deduction there ever was.
Kerry voted for 16 free trade agreements including NAFTA. (bye bye jobs)
Kerry voted for unilateral disarmement.(hello cold war)
Kerry voted against the 1st gulf war.
Kerry spent a winter in vietnam
Kerry threw away his medals...Obviousley someone threw them back.
Kerry spoke 20 minutes on the flag during convention.
Kerry voted 4 times in favor of burning the flag.
This stuff off the top of my head...never mind what Carl Rove has in store...bwa..bwa.bwa..aahaha...ahaha...AHAHA...AHAHAHAHA!!!
We are going to have a serious problem if we overextend
our troops with nation-building missions
[Bush]: "...The other day, I was honored to be flanked
by Colin Powell and General Norman Schwarzkopf,
who stood by my side and agreed with me. They said
we could, even though we're the strongest military, that
if we don't do something quickly, we don't have a
clearer vision of the military, if we don't stop extending
our troops all around the world in nation-building
missions, then we're going to have a serious
problem coming down the road. And I'm
going to prevent that..."
our troops with nation-building missions
[Bush]: "...The other day, I was honored to be flanked
by Colin Powell and General Norman Schwarzkopf,
who stood by my side and agreed with me. They said
we could, even though we're the strongest military, that
if we don't do something quickly, we don't have a
clearer vision of the military, if we don't stop extending
our troops all around the world in nation-building
missions, then we're going to have a serious
problem coming down the road. And I'm
going to prevent that..."
2000 quote
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by codeworks:
We are going to have a serious problem if we overextend
our troops with nation-building missions
[Bush]: "...The other day, I was honored to be flanked
by Colin Powell and General Norman Schwarzkopf,
who stood by my side and agreed with me. They said
we could, even though we're the strongest military, that
if we don't do something quickly, we don't have a
clearer vision of the military, if we don't stop extending
our troops all around the world in nation-building
missions, then we're going to have a serious
problem coming down the road. And I'm
going to prevent that..." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by codeworks:
We are going to have a serious problem if we overextend
our troops with nation-building missions
[Bush]: "...The other day, I was honored to be flanked
by Colin Powell and General Norman Schwarzkopf,
who stood by my side and agreed with me. They said
we could, even though we're the strongest military, that
if we don't do something quickly, we don't have a
clearer vision of the military, if we don't stop extending
our troops all around the world in nation-building
missions, then we're going to have a serious
problem coming down the road. And I'm
going to prevent that..." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
how bout this one a classic !
He will be a train wreck in the debates.
Tax cuts will be implemented without budget
deficits, even in a recession
[Bush] "...we can proceed with tax relief without
fear of budget deficits, even if the economy softens.
Projections for the surplus in my budget
are cautious and conservative. They already
assume an economic slowdown in the year 2001..."
Budget deficits under Bush hit a record high
He will be a train wreck in the debates.
Tax cuts will be implemented without budget
deficits, even in a recession
[Bush] "...we can proceed with tax relief without
fear of budget deficits, even if the economy softens.
Projections for the surplus in my budget
are cautious and conservative. They already
assume an economic slowdown in the year 2001..."
Budget deficits under Bush hit a record high
