Posted on 02/08/2005 8:32:49 PM PST by AJFavish
The first excerpt is from Meet the Press over a week ago. The second excerpt is from an interview with Don Imus, in which Imus asks Kerry to explain what he said on MTP.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6886726/
MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe that Iraq is less a terrorist threat to the United States now than it was two years ago?
SEN. KERRY: No, it's more. And, in fact, I believe the world is less safe today than it was two and a half years ago. And, you know, I think this is one of the difficulties of what I tried to carry in the course of the campaign.
. . . .
MR. RUSSERT: Is the United States safer with the newly elected Iraqi government than we would have been with Saddam Hussein?
SEN. KERRY: Sure.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6928257/
Sen. John Kerry on lessons learned
MSNBC's Don Imus talks to Sen. John Kerry about his 2004 campaign, voting against Condoleezza Rice, the war in Iraq, death benefits, and whether or not he's going to run again
TRANSCRIPT EXCERPT
Updated: 12:03 p.m. ET Feb. 7, 2005
. . . .
IMUS: Russert also asked you about if you believe that Iraq is less a terrorist threat now than it was two years ago, and you said, “No, it was more.”
And then he asked you if the United States is safer with the newly elected Iraqi government than it would have been under Saddam Hussein, and you said, “Sure,” and I’m just wondering how it could be both.
KERRY: Well, I think he asked me whether or not we were safer in the world in terms of terrorism, not whether or not Iraq was less. He did ask the other question—if I recall correctly, and I think that’s what it was, “In general are we safer?”
And the answer is, you know, we’re not because you’ve got this dispersment of the Al Qaeda in about 60 different countries. Yes, we’ve caught some of the top leaders, but there’s nobody in the intelligence community who doesn’t believe that a lot of that has been filled, you know, at different levels all around the world and now in more countries.
Secondly, we have not succeeded in joining in the initiative with the British and the French and the Germans in getting Iran and its nuclear program put to bed. They have, in fact, pushed further down the road.
And, thirdly, North Korea has more nuclear weapons today than it had when the Bush administration began, and those talks appear to be relatively stalemated and getting worse.
And today on the front page of the New York Times, there’s a story about the U.S. redesigning atomic weapons and so forth, which, you know, I think it’s the wrong road to be going down on a unilateral basis. I think if you want to redesign some and do it in a way that’s understood as part of a process with other countries, you’re stronger.
But in the end, I think the world is, in many ways, more dangerous than it was before Iraq.
IMUS: Actually, what he asked you—he did ask you if you believed Iraq is less a terrorist threat now than it was...
KERRY: Well, no, Iraq is not—I mean, look, Saddam Hussein was a bum. We all know that. Saddam Hussein, you know, had the intention down the road some time to continue to try to develop.
But at that moment in time, it was not a terrorist threat in the sense that we have a Zarqawi, a bunch of terrorists, people being blown up every day. It wasn’t that kind of threat.
And we had two-thirds of the country completely contained with the fly-over zone. He couldn’t fly an airplane anywhere. His military was getting weaker by the day. He had sanctions on them him that, yes, they were getting broken but it was a country getting weaker by the day, not unleashing terrorism the way it is today.
Thirty people were killed yesterday. That wasn’t happening on a daily basis.
I know you can come back and say, “But he killed 300,000 of his own people.” I know that. I hate that. You hate that. We all do. He was a bum, he was a thug, a terrible guy.
But if Bush had come to Congress—we don’t really need to relitigate this—but if Bush had come to Congress and said, “I want $300 billion and we’re going to lose at least, you know, 1,500 kids—ultimately, maybe more—in an effort to just bring democracy,” he would not have won that vote.
. . . .
Regards,
Allan J. Favish
http://www.allanfavish.com
Was this BEFORE or AFTER he promised to sign the SF-180?
Saddam is a "bum"---
When I think of a "bum", I think of Clem Caddilhopper(sp)-
That has been Kerry's problem all his life--he just sees things out of eyes that are focused differently than most peoples--
He calls Bush a liar---liar v. bum, bum v. liar---I would say liar is worse, so in Kerry's world Bush should be the one sitting in prison---I guess.
What a maroon!!!
MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe that Iraq is less a terrorist threat to the United States now than it was two years ago?
SEN. KERRY: No, it's more. And, in fact, I believe the world is less safe today than it was two and a half years ago. And, you know, I think this is one of the difficulties of what I tried to carry in the course of the campaign.
Thank God this idiot didn`t win.
Thank you God for George E. Bush
The press would be all over Bush for such incoherent babble, yet Kerry is considered a brain surgeon.
No he wasn`t. He was a killer. Bums live off rich widows and do nothing.
This guy is truly on crack. Al Qaeda on the run, Saddam in custody, Democracy established in Iraq, Kaddafi gives up his nukes, tyrants not emboldened for once, Arafat is dead...What would he consider safer, the opposite?
Why does the transcript of this nuanced intellectual read like a fifteen year old valley girl with the "you know" speech pattern?
Thank you God for President Bush and his clarity!
And herein lies one (of many) of Kerry's problems. His many lies are too easily intercepted and decoded. Kerry, Gore, and both Clintons all lie with roughly equal facility. Kerry and Gore are, however, more easily caught. They seem to labor under the same odd pathology that compels them to tell outright whoppers when the truth would serve them better.
What's the Kerry Lie I look Forward to Most?
Eventually, someone will ask Kerry about his Naval discharge/separation in 1972, and whether-or-not is was Honorable. (I suspect most strongly that it was not honorable)
I predict yet another (to use a Kerryism) Kerry double Whopper, even though the truth would probably be more politically expedient.
.
It is so comforting to know how "safe" Kerry makes me feel knowing he talks to foreign leaders and asks them "Why don't you train more people?" wow- I wish Bush had known it was that simple.......I think he is lamer than Gore but has a similar way of lying
is george E Bush like that other kerry guy that won new york?
OOPS - late back here on the east coast - time for bed
you got that right. i dont get off work until 1:30, i'm thankful that i can check FR on a regular basis to get through the night.
have a good night. :-D
He actually seems to believe that foreign countries would love nothing more than to engage in thoughtful dialog and live happily ever after in some sort of mutualistic international collective.
Kerry apparently believes that there is nothing wrong with the world that a conference table (and a few American concessions) can't fix. If Kerry could only talk to them... now that would put everything right, wouldn't it?
It's as though he lives in a delusional "chick flick"* kind of world.
*(Meaning no offense, of course, to Freeper ladies who enjoy romantic comedies and maybe even a good cry.)
.
I am hoping that a Kerry supporter can explain to me what Kerry is saying.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.