Kerry's loosing his mind

from PolMach Forums
Kerry had recently has siad thing that make me wounder if he is loosing it.

1. The secret plan to hurt milk producers:

SPRING GREEN, Wis. Sept. 27, 2004 — Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry told voters in America's Dairyland on Monday that President Bush had a secret plan that would hurt milk producers after the election.

Kerry tried to convince voters in this rural community, where he is practicing for Thursday's debate, that he would look out for dairy farms here even though he hadn't always in the past.

The Bush campaign issued a statement that said accounts of White House opposition to the milk program are false.

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040927_1007.html

2. Germany and France will send troops to Iraq, even though they publicly say they will not:

By Jo Johnson in Paris, Betrand Benoit in Berlin and James Harding in Washington
Published: September 26 2004 21:13 | Last updated: September 26 2004 21:13

French and German government officials say they will not significantly increase military assistance in Iraq even if John Kerry, the Democratic presidential challenger, is elected on November 2.

3. He says that Bush has secret plans to do a massive military call up after the election. Which is only the normal Iraq rotation.

I think the man is loosing it. He is seeing secrete plans behind every door and think countries will send massive troops to Iraq because he will ask then politly. Some one slap him and bring him out of his day dreams please.

That's My Two Cents
politics
4,432 views 11 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
he he he . . . are you saying Kerry's loose? What a slut!

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Its not that hes is loosing it, but rather he was never quite all there. He is still better than bush. I believe there have been talks about a draft (is this not correct)
Multiplicity - Control multiple PCs using one keyboard and mouse
Reply #3 from PolMach Forums Top
Hey Texas Wahine, I agree!!! I'd rather he let loose with his mind and let people know what he's thinking.....it's better than if he was losing his mind!
Reply #4 from PolMach Forums Top
As for point number one....you miss the main point of Kerry's talk in Wisconsin by skipping around the article. His main argument is that he wants to help the farmers in the midwest as he helped the ones in the northeast while representing MA. He also wants to return jobs to Wisconsin that have been lost the last four years. That was the main point of the article. Focusing on jobs and agriculture is not the most inflammatory point in the article, but it was the main point (if we were in high school, it would be the "theme").
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hey Texas Wahine, I agree!!! I'd rather he let loose with his mind and let people know what he's thinking.....it's better than if he was losing his mind!
Reply #6 from PolMach Forums Top
Point two is interesting because it relies on adjectives and how the press interprets it...
French and German government officials say they will not significantly increase military assistance in Iraq


Which could mean that they will increase support but it will not be massive amounts...

However, if you read further along in that article from the Financial Times (yes I looked it up after seeing that the first article had cherry picked points).....

Gert Weisskirchen, member of parliament and foreign policy expert for Germany's ruling Social Democratic Party, said in an interview. “That said, Mr Kerry seems genuinely committed to multilateralism and as president he would find it easier than Mr Bush to secure the German government's backing in other matters.”

Meaning outside of the Iraq issue, Germany feels that US/German relations would be much better with Mr. Kerry...hmmm....
Moreover, if you read further in the article one of the main objections that France has to providing troops is that they have poor relations with the Iraq PM! A French official even said the French would re-examine their position if Bush and Allawi both are not in power!

For those who would like to read the full article....
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/eeff0f78-10e9-11d9-a73b-00000e2511c8.html

So the main point I get from the 2nd article is that the French and Germans don't foresee sending troops to Iraq, HOWEVER they feel that foreign relations would improve and that they would be more cooperative under a Kerry administration and would re-examine their positions on Iraq if Kerry is elected.

I guess I'm saying that after the first two articles, where is Kerry losing his mind? Is it by saying he wants to protect American farms and jobs? Is that bad? Or is it because Germany and France both believe say they would better cooperate and listen more to a Kerry administration? Is that bad to have allies who want to cooperate?
Reply #7 from PolMach Forums Top
The 3rd point has no reference so I can't check up on it....although I have heard from both sides (R and D) that there may be a need for a larger call up to ensure stability in Iraq leading up to their national elections....

ummm....and I guess that's my 2 bits....

"Do I dare disturb the universe?" TS Eliot
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
" Its not that hes is loosing it, but rather he was never quite all there. He is still better than bush."


Speaks volumes. At this point the "anyone but Bush" camp would embrace anything to win.
Reply #9 from PolMach Forums Top
Rugby

Subject 1 and 3. You can change the subject all you want, but Kerry was talking about a Secret plans. I did not say that he was not wanting to help the farms, but he is making a point of SECRET PLANS. He is trying to spin something in to SECRET evil PLANS. So when anybody asks him where the proof is, he can easly say that these are Secrete plans and thats why I have none. Thats a nice easy way to lie to someone. He is taking a page from Mr. Moore's playbook.

Subject 2. Just as you are accusing me of picking only what fits into my arguement, you are doing the same thing. The Germans are already supporting us elsewhere in the world, I do not deny that at all. In fact that is one of my main points in another post as to why they will not be sending troops.

“That said, Mr Kerry seems genuinely committed to multilateralism and as president he would find it easier than Mr Bush to secure the German government's backing in other matters.”

I don't see anywhere in your picked sentence saying anything about troops, just backing other matters, which is pointedly not Iraq.

As for the French:

A French government official said: “People don't expect that much would change under a Kerry administration, even if things can only getbetter. We do not anticipate a sudden honeymoon in the event that Kerry replaces Bush. A lot depends on who is in power in both Washington and Baghdad.

No where in their statement did they say they would send troops either. In fact the more times I read it the less it looks like they will send troops, no matter who is in power.

I think that Kerry will not have the power to remove the PM.
Then if he does in order to get French support, he is in for a much bigger let down. So no help will come from there. But Kerry's point is that he will get help in Iraq. So in the long run we are looking at Kerry having bad relations with Iraq, Poland, UK, ,Japan, Italy and all the others that have troops there. While only gaining a cheering section from France and Germany. Nothing like pissing the rest of our allies off just to please the French.

You can attack the articals all you want, my basic point of this post is that Kerry is Losing touch with reality. He is making things up to fit his dreams. Unfortunately, other poeple are thinking his dreams will be reality, much the same the Hilter Youth followed Hilter in the last days. The biggest problem is the rest of use will pay in the end.

That's My Two Cents

PS. Sorry about the looser thing.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
" Its not that hes is loosing it, but rather he was never quite all there. He is still better than bush."

Speaks volumes. At this point the "anyone but Bush" camp would embrace anything to win.


Vote for Kerry if you like Kerry, don't vote for Kerry because he's the Anti-Bush. Know where his stances are and what his issues are. The reasons you don't like Bush, his stances on issues, the views that Kerry has v.s. Bush. Don't just say I like Kerry because he's not Bush, because you don't know his stances then. For all you know, you could vote in someone who is even more incompatible with your views then Bush.
Reply #11 from PolMach Forums Top
The main point of my post is that you were missing the overall picture of both of the articles. I then stated what the main point of the articles were. Your point was to take one quote and use that to define the article. But the main point of the article was not the SECRET plan. It was protecting farms and creating jobs. The SECRET plan was one line in his speech that the writer expanded upon.

I showed the quotes from German and French officials to show to you why it is dangerous to define an article by one picked quote. As you noted, the Germans and the French will probably not send more help to Iraq (point for Bush). But they are more open to working with and cooperating with a Kerry administration that seeks their opinion rather than ignore it (point for Kerry). Actually let's go back to the quote you used because it is instructive of why adjectives can be used to make both sides right in a given case:

French and German government officials say they will not significantly increase military assistance in Iraq even if John Kerry, the Democratic presidential challenger, is elected on November 2.


This statement, at face value, says that France and Germany will increase military assistance if Kerry is elected. HOWEVER, the increases will not be significant. Thus, the Kerry campaign can say they will increase support while the Bush campaign can point to the fact that a Kerry election will not change the overall effect of France and Germany's involvement.

That is why it is important to know the whole context of the article and not to use a singular quote to define the article. I picked the quotes I did to "balance" the assertions you made above and to show that the articles did not prove that Kerry was "losing his mind." Based on parts of the article both campaigns can make points proving they are right.

BTW- I'm not attacking the articles. I'm just attacking the way they are being used And no worries about the "looser" thing, I still have to work on their, there, and (not as much) they're.