Anytime a liberal, like Al Franken for instance, accuses a conservative of making baseless accusations, direct 'em to the internet. I sometimes think libs take advantage of our ADD-channelchanging-youhavemyattentionforexatcly5seconds culture. I try to sit through a Sunday morning news program, or even Fox News (anymore), and I see interview questions that could be discussed intelligently at great length crammed into 5 second responses. This lets either side make accusations but doesn't allow the other side to back them up; it seems that the left takes particular advantage of this.
Kucinich, this morning on Meet the Press, seemed to completely ignore every question posed to him and instead used every speaking opportunity to attack the president, the War in Iraq, the very hope of freedom there, as well as any hope a success in the War on Terror.
For instance, Kucinich called the situation in Iraq a quagmire... calling Iraq a quagmire is preposterous. 9/11 was a quagmire. That day we lost over 3000 souls to the terrorists' (less than) 20. Since 9/11 we have lost over 1000 less soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan than the number of civilian women, children, police and firefighters that we lost on that tragic September day. Since 9/11 we have deposed of two brutal regimes that harbored terrorists and openly called the American People its enemy, and countless thousands of enemy combatants... But I digress, the purpose of this post is to show intellectual midgets like Franken (I apologize to any little people who were offended by being linked in any way to Franken) that conservatives don't have the problem of not being able to substantiate our arguments... We just have so much evidence we could never hope to get it all in for a 5 second response to one of their preposterous charges.
In keeping with this idea, I submit to you, the following (posted with permission from the author)
Why does John Kerry flip-flop? Some people think that this is a cold calculation on his part - that he's trying to look like all things to all people just to get votes. This would suggest that John Kerry doesn't actually believe in anything, except getting power for himself. I always try to assume the best about people, so I refuse to believe that he's capable of such callous scheming. I prefer to think that John Kerry waffles because he can't help it. I think John Kerry is a good person who just happens to be schizophrenic. What do you think?
Does Senator Kerry own an SUV?
Yes
February 5, 2004 (Michigan caucuses): "We have some SUVs. We have a Jeep. We have a couple of Chrysler minivans. We have a PT Cruiser up in Boston. I have an old Dodge 600 that I keep in the Senate. ... We also have a Chevy, a big Suburban."
No
April 22, 2004 (Earth Day): "I don't own an SUV... The family has it. I don't have it."
Should the president use diplomacy to achieve lower gasoline prices in the USA?
Yes
March 31, 2004: Kerry accuses President Bush of not doing enough diplomatically to achieve lower gasoline prices, saying "I'll use real diplomacy to do what George Bush hasn't -- pressure OPEC to start providing more oil".
No
April 19, 2004: Less than 3 weeks later, Kerry slams Bush over speculation that Bush may have made a deal with Saudi Arabia to get lower gasoline prices. He states "If, as Bob Woodward reports, it is true that gas supplies and prices in America are tied to the American election, tied to a secret White House deal, that is outrageous and unacceptable to the American people".
Should wars be an issue in a Presidential election?
No
In February 1992, John Kerry urges people not to use the Vietnam war to divide the nation during a presidential campaign.
Yes
In January 2004, John Kerry's presidential campaign accuses George Bush of being a deserter during the Vietnam War. Meanwhile, Kerry has produced ads trumpeting his own heroism during the war.
No
But Kerry doesn't approve of President Bush talking about his success during the current war. Kerry's wife has been funding anti-Bush organizations which are now decrying every reference to the war in President Bush's TV ads.
Should we commit our military to establishing a peaceful democracy in Iraq?
Yes
In October 2002, Senator Kerry votes for authorizing the use of force against Iraq. Senate approves the bill 77 to 23.
(Later in an interview about the funding of the effort) 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 abandon our troops and recklessly leave Iraq to whatever follows as a result of simply cutting and running. That's irresponsible."
No
In October 2003, Senator Kerry then votes against the $87 billion to fund the security and reconstruction of post-war Iraq and Afghanistan. Kerry's side loses 87 to 12. Note that several Senators switch sides in the opposite sense to Kerry: they vote for the funds now to ensure that the job gets done, even though they had earlier voted against the war.
Yes
On December 7, 2003, two months after voting against the $87 billion, Kerry blames President Bush for the slow deployment of new body armor to troops in Iraq.
"... Saddam Hussein was a totalitarian who waged a reign of terror against his people and repeatedly endangered the peace of the world. And no one can doubt that we are safer - and Iraq is better - because Saddam Hussein is now behind bars."
-John Kerry, December 16, 2003.
No
"... On one side is President Bush who has taken America off onto the road of unilateralism and ideological preemption."
-John Kerry, same speech, December 16, 2003.
Yes
On the other side are those in my own party who threaten to take us down a road of confusion and retreat.
-John Kerry, same speech, December 16, 2003.
?
"When America needed leadership on Iraq, Howard Dean was all over the lot, with a lot of slogans and a lot less solutions. One moment he supported authorizing the use of force, the next he criticized those who did."
--John Kerry, same speech, December 16, 2003.
No
"I have said many times I believe that America should have worked to get international backing before going to war."
--John Kerry, same speech, December 16, 2003.
Yes
"... for Howard Dean to permit a veto over when America can or cannot act not only becomes little more than a pretext for doing nothing - it cedes our security and presidential responsibility to defend America to someone else."
--John Kerry, same speech, December 16, 2003.
Is the Patriot Act a good idea?
Yes
October 2001: Kerry votes for the Patriot Act.
No
As of December 2003 Kerry opposes the Patriot Act.
Was liberating Kuwait in the first Gulf War the right thing to do?
No
Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition ... to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war.
-Letter from John Kerry , Jan. 22, 1991.
Yes
Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf.
-Letter from John Kerry, Jan. 31, 1991.
Did John Kerry throw away his Vietnam medals or not?
Yes
November 6, 1971 Interviewer: How many did you give back, John?
Kerry: I gave back, I can't remember, six, seven, eight, nine medals.
Interviewer: You were awarded the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and three Purple Hearts. (5 medals)
Kerry: Well, and above that, I gave back my others.
No
April 26, 2004 "What I said was, and back then, you know, ribbons, medals were absolutely interchangeable ... I threw my ribbons. I didn't have my medals."
Waffles 
