It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

IS Kerry Anti Defence?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Kerry has portrayed himself to be a tuff guy on defence. No doubt he made his Vietnam service a corrnerstone of his campaign to show that he was not soft on the defence issue However, one simply has to look at Kerry’s history in public office to become very concerned that a Kerry administration will leave our country at its weakest point since the Carter administration. This post is part of my overall post in the Campaign 2004 Issue forum. On to the cuts:

In an 1984 in written Budget Plan, Kerry proposed canceling the following programs to save money: The MX Missile, the B-1, Star Wars, Anti-Satellite weapons, the Apache Gunship, DIVAD, the Patriot Missile, the Ageis system, the Harrier, further F-15 procurement, the F-14D, the Phoenix and Sparrow missile improvements.

When he has voted, he has also, either tried to kill programs or reduce Americas strength in key areas.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5/11/1988, 1. S 2355: Vote to table [kill] an amendment that would keep the US strategic arsenal roughly in line with the US-Soviet strategic arms limitation treaty of 1979 [SALT II], which had not been ratified at the time. Kerry voted NO to not kill the amendment, which would have required us to live by a treaty that we never ratified. The motion was tabled 51-45.
1991, the 1. Gulf War. Kerry voted NO but the resolution passed 52-47

7/31/1991, 1. S 1507: Vote on an amendment that would show it is the United States' goal to maintain strategic stability with the Soviet Union. Still not understanding the success of the Reagan defense build-up, Kerry voted YES. The amendment failed 43-56.

8/1/1991, 1. S 1507: Discontinue production of B-2 bomber. Kerry voted YES but the bill failed 42-57.

9/10/1991, 1. HR 2707: Voted To Slash Over $3 Billion from Defense, Shift Money to Social Programs. Only 27 Senators joined Kerry in voting for the defense cut. (H.R. 2707, CQ Vote #182: Motion Rejected 28-69: R 3-39; D 25-30, 9/10/91, Kerry Voted Yea)

9/9/1992, 1. S Con Res 106: Reduce the defense spending levels for smaller weapon projects by $8.8 billion in fiscal 1993. Kerry voted YES, but the measure was rejected 45-50.

5/5/1992, 1. S 2403: Cancel funding for a second and third Seawolf nuclear submarine. Kerry voted NO, and the measure failed 46-52. Hallelujah! Finally a defense system that Kerry liked! Where's that Seawolf built again? Oh yeah. Connecticut.

9/18/1992, 1. S 3114: Cut $2,686,572,000 from the bill for production of additional B-2 stealth bombers, halting production of the B-2 fleet at 15 planes instead of the 20 planes requested by the administration. Kerry voted YES but the measure failed 45-53.

1993: Kerry introduced 1. S 1163, where the liberal northeastern Senator supported a whole plethora of defense cuts, including:
Reduction in the operating tempo of ballistic missile submarines.
Reduction in the attack submarine force.
Reduction in the antisubmarine warfare weapon systems of the Navy.
Reduction in number of light divisions.
Reduction in number of tactical fighter wings.
Limitation on expenditures for nuclear weapons research, development, and testing activities of the Department of Energy.
Strategic Defense Initiative (limiting the scope)
Termination of the MHC(V) coastal mine-hunting ship program.
Termination of the Kinetic Energy Anti-satellite Attack program.
Force the Retirement of no less than 60,000 members of the armed forces in one year

7/1/1994, 1. S 2182: Cut $150 million for additional B-2 stealth bombers. Kerry voted YES for the cut but the measure failed 45-55.

8/10/1994, HR 4650: Eliminate funding for Trident II submarine-launched missiles. Kerry voted YES but the measure failed 40-60. A strange history of voting for the submarines but against the missiles on the submarines. Or, in other words, he voted for the submarines before he voted against the submarine-launched missiles.

1/26/1996, 1. S 1124 (also here): Vote to adopt a revised version of a bill [HR 1530] to authorize $265.3 billion in appropriations for 1996 for military activities of the Department of Defense, military construction, and Department of Energy defense activities. The bill includes a 2.4% cost-of-living increase for members of the armed forces, among other provisions. This revised bill deletes a provision in the original bill requiring that the U.S. develop an affordable and effective national missile defense system to be operational by 2003. There is also a provision requiring the president to certify Congress in advance that any future deployment of U.S. troops under the operational control of the UN is in the U.S. national security interest, among other changes. Kerry voted NO but the bill passed 56-34.

9/13/2000, 1. HR 4444: Vote to table [kill] an amendment that would require sanctions against China or other countries if they were found to be selling illicit weapons of mass destruction. Not favoring sanctions, Kerry voted YES and the amendment was killed 65-32.
Taken From: www.tacitus.org...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are but a few of the bills that Kerry has voted on (He has missed a few over the years) or proposed. Given his track record on killing defense bills I have serious concerns about his long term impact on national defense. The list of systems that he proposed to kill in 1984 form the backbone of our military today. He tried again to make further deep cuts in 1993 after the Gulf War. Kerry proposes to make up for all the cuts by forming global alliances and the like. However, one has never been able to negotiate from a position of weakness... EVER. Cozing up to France on international issues wont make me sleep better at night.




posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 03:12 PM
link   
www.gop.com...
Yes, Kerry is anti defense for America. He is also pro-UN,
which that in itself is anti defense for America.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 03:13 PM
link   
They way Crest is tough on cavities.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apollyon
They way Crest is tough on cavities.


If Kerry were a dentist he would be the 5th guy that did not recomend Flouride. How is he going to pay for that ambitious Social agenda of his?




posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 03:40 PM
link   
NO, Kerry is not tough on defense. Just look at his Senate record. The National Review has him ranked as the most liberal senator... even more liberal than Kennedy or Clinton. Kerry would rather "buy the world a coke and teach them to sing in perfect harmony" as opposed to living in the REAL WORLD and recognizing that we have enemies that are angling every single day to destroy us. Sorry, but if Kerry becomes President you can fully expect another terrorist attack on US soil to follow almost immediately.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Its really scarry if you look at his record on defence, the only major project he has not opposed is the Seawolf, a Democratic pork barrel project that was forced down the navies throat



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 03:46 PM
link   
You are amazing ... Send me a link to all your links I will belive any thing researched that well ... Thanks ... For the input ..



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by bet555
You are amazing ... Send me a link to all your links I will belive any thing researched that well ... Thanks ... For the input ..

www.tacitus.org...

This page is very good in outlying Kerry's record on defence. Also it links to each bill so you can see the exact specifics of it. The beginning of the page is the copy of the 1984 Kerry Defence plane where he tries to cut EVERY major defence system that is the cornerstone of our military today

The Seawolf Vote:
Seawolf Nuclear Submarine Funding

Bill Number: S 2403
Issue: Defense
Date: 05/05/1992
Sponsor: McCain, R-AZ


Roll Call Number: 0083
Rejected
Full Member List


Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.

Cancel funding for a second and third Seawolf nuclear submarine.

S 2403 (Fiscal 1992 Rescissions);
Amendment;
5/5/92

Outcome: Rejected 46-52

Congressional Quarterly Number: 1992 - S83

Amendment introduced by McCain, R-AZ.

Bill Status:
Bill Number: S 2403 - 102nd Congress (1991-92)
No passage votes were taken on this bill, never became law. HR 4990 passed instead.

Bill Status:
Bill Number: HR 4990 - 102nd Congress (1991-92)
House Passage Vote: 05/07/92 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Passage Vote: 05/12/92 - Outcome: Passed
House Conference Report Vote: 05/21/92 - Outcome: Passed
Senate Conference Report Vote: 05/21/92 - Outcome: Passed
Presidential Action: Signed on 06/04/92
Public Law Number: 102-298 106 Stat. 217
www.vote-smart.org...



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 04:17 PM
link   
and noone can dispute it either, i looked for myself on the senate website and it shows this as true, heres one i found so far www.senate.gov...



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

...They way Crest is tough on cavities.

If Kerry were a dentist he would be the 5th guy that did not recomend Flouride.


Fred, that was awesome & got a great laugh out of me!


As to the thread content, is bullshyyyyte!


Pentagon or "defense" ( makes it sound so much more visceral & immediate, no?) spending has been THE PORK BARREL for time immortal. To state that we've been made less safe due to not having the exponetial redundancy of arms, or arms systems that are still in the theory phase, is to be sucked into the Military Industrial Complex's decades old marketing plan.
But hey, don't take my workd for it, look at the missle defense system that they're blowing billions on!

Outspending a decimated economy (Russia) in Cold War purchases is not sound.
Outspending the next 25 nations of the world combined on weaponry that doesn't speak to the state of warfare we're in for the forseeable future, is not sound.
And your posts have overlooked a serious problem with Republican lawmakers: They tack on riders that make bills unpassable in any other forum except a GOP majority. The HS Bill was a 32 page document before Republicans got a hold of it and turned it into a 500 + page Monster of special interest catering. ( No one has ever explained to me why a huge GOP contributing Pharmaceutical company needed lawsuit protection in a Homeland Security Bill because their Mecury based preservative caused Autism in kids!?!?
)



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Yes, Kerry is anti-defense! You won't be safe with him as President! He'll sick the dogs on you. Or the bees. Or the dogs with bees in their mouths and when they bark they shoot bees at you!
Vote Bush! Vote as if your life depended upon it! Ooo-ga boo-ga!




posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
Yes, Kerry is anti-defense! You won't be safe with him as President! He'll sick the dogs on you. Or the bees. Or the dogs with bees in their mouths and when they bark they shoot bees at you!


Level II Sacrcasm aside, did you have a point or were you just plagerizing the Simpsons? What next "My worst eh? Smithers release the robotic Richard Simmons"



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 06:29 PM
link   
I thought it would be much more effective to gain the support of other countries, that way we wont have to fight a war alone...

Nah, lets take on the world instead... You guys are idiots, you don't think five minutes ahead of yourself.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   
The point is, Kerry has a record on defense that he should be proud of, unlike, say, someone like Vice President Cheney.



"George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are trying to tear down John Kerry, a decorated war hero, with their misleading ad campaign. Not only are these attacks false, Cheney himself tried to cut many of the same weapons systems that the Bush campaign is now attacking John Kerry on. Bush and Cheney are the ones who sent our military to Iraq without basic equipment like body armor and with no plan for bringing the troops home. It's time for Bush and Cheney to stop misleading and start telling the truth."

Independents for Kerry


And it's really getting tiring hearing all of these half-truths paraded around, trying to scare people into hurting themselves. I'll even cut Bush/Cheney some slack. We don't know what admendments were attached to those bills. Our congress is nutty. A bill about B-52's could have an admendment slashing school lunches. Let's not oversimplify the process. I know some people need oversimplififcation, but hopefully they don't dwell on ATS.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   
We went into Iraq with a coaltion of 32-nations. But I guess since France and Germany are not on that list we are going it alone.
Im sure if we offered to pay France and Germany all the money they would lose from Saddam getting taking out of power they would have joined up too. But Bush wasnt about to do that.

We are at war and a voting record like that of Kerrys is not what we need in a wartime President.

Ask yourself who do you think the terrorist are more afraid of Bush or Kerry?



[edit on 30-8-2004 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 06:53 PM
link   
No leader ever starts something with no plan for ending. Oh wait, Bush did, nevermind. The entire Iraqi war could have been handled so differently, the point is, is that Bush ignored the suggested military strategies and got us stuck into a war that could have lasted a couple of months, but is now a few years. We need a change in strategy, all I can do is hope that Kerry can turn this war around.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 07:05 PM
link   
How about posting how he voted on defense issues after 9/11?



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 07:06 PM
link   
S2355, 05/11-1988: Vote on a motion that would allow the Senate to reconsider an amendment that had been tabled [killed] in an earlier vote. The amendment would have reduced funding for the strategic defense intiatiave [SDI] or 'Star Wars' missile defense program from $4.5 billion to $3.8 billion for fiscal 1989. The difference of $700 million would go to NASA for the purpose of building a new space shuttle. Kerry voted yes.

The idea was to clear more money to build Endeavour as a replacement for Challenger, destroyed two years earlier

HR-4781, 08/10/1988 Vote on an amendment to provide $27.14 million in humanitarian aid to Nicaraguan contras and establish procedures for congressional consideration of President Reagan's request of $16.5 million worth of stockpiled military aid to the contras. Kerry voted YES.

From what I've read, what the amendment said is "We're not against military aid to the contras, but we want to study the President's request more in depth. Meanwhile, here's money to help feed and clothe the contras." What's wrong with that?

S 1507, 07/31/1991 - Vote on an amendment that would show it is the United States' goal to maintain strategic stability with the Soviet Union while at the same time deploying an anti-ballistic missile system with one or more ground based sites and space-based sensors. The amendment would also clarify that current actions by the U.S. are treaty compliant. Kerry voted YES.

The situation in the Soviet Union in the summer of 1991 was very volatile - the very next day, August 1, 1991, Gorbachev's vice president Guennadi Yanayev staged a conservative coup, which lasted four days. Gorbachev had to walk a fine line between Yeltsin's reformists and the very unsatisfied communist conservatives. Any sign of the United States edging past or seeking to edge past the Soviets in nuclear firepower could have further destabilized the fragile political balance in the USSR and precipitated a SUCCESSFUL coup against Gorbachev.

What do I mean by all this? There's always a CONTEXT.

More to come.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrJingles
No leader ever starts something with no plan for ending. Oh wait, Bush did, nevermind. The entire Iraqi war could have been handled so differently, the point is, is that Bush ignored the suggested military strategies and got us stuck into a war that could have lasted a couple of months, but is now a few years. We need a change in strategy, all I can do is hope that Kerry can turn this war around.


Turn it around How? Cut the defence budget? Kowtow to the French? Kerry has a track record of being soft on defence period. He has voted against every defence bill that has come his way. He has flip flopped on missile defence with the changing winds. Kerry lacks the vision and the fortitude to wage any war and will allow our military to fall to levels not seen sice the Carter administration. Oh but our relations with the French will be better than ever.



posted on Aug, 30 2004 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by W_HAMILTON
How about posting how he voted on defense issues after 9/11?


Hard to say anything about Kerry record after 911 what with all the flip flops:



The Iraq War

Kerry Voted For Authorization To Use Force In Iraq. (H.J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #237: Passed 77-23: R 48-1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, Kerry Voted Yea.)

In First Dem Debate, Kerry Strongly Supported President’s Action In Iraq. KERRY: “George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.” (ABC News, Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Columbia, SC, 5/4/03)

Kerry Later Claimed He Voted “To Threaten” Use Of Force In Iraq. “I voted to threaten the use of force to make Saddam Hussein comply with the resolutions of the United Nations.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Announcement Of Presidential Candidacy, Mount Pleasant, SC, 9/2/03)

Now, Kerry Says He Is Anti-War Candidate. CHRIS MATTHEWS: “Do you think you belong to that category of candidates who more or less are unhappy with this war, the way it’s been fought, along with General Clark, along with Howard Dean and not necessarily in companionship politically on the issue of the war with people like Lieberman, Edwards and Gephardt? Are you one of the anti-war candidates?” KERRY: “I am -- Yes, in the sense that I don’t believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 1/6/04)


On Attacking President During Time Of War

In March 2003, Kerry Promised Not To Attack President When War Began. “Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts … said he will cease his complaints once the shooting starts. ‘It’s what you owe the troops,’ said a statement from Kerry, a Navy veteran of the Vietnam War. ‘I remember being one of those guys and reading news reports from home. If America is at war, I won’t speak a word without measuring how it’ll sound to the guys doing the fighting when they’re listening to their radios in the desert.’” (Glen Johnson, “Democrats On The Stump Plot Their War Rhetoric,” The Boston Globe, 3/11/03)

But Weeks Later, With Troops Just Miles From Baghdad, Kerry Broke His Pledge. “‘What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States,’ Kerry said in a speech at the Peterborough Town Library. Despite pledging two weeks ago to cool his criticism of the administration once war began, Kerry unleashed a barrage of criticism as US troops fought within 25 miles of Baghdad.” (Glen Johnson, “Kerry Says Us Needs Its Own ‘Regime Change,’” The Boston Globe, 4/3/03)

Death Penalty For Terrorists

In 1996, Kerry Attacked Governor Bill Weld For Supporting Death Penalty For Terrorists. KERRY: “Your policy would amount to a terrorist protection policy. Mine would put them in jail.” (1996 Massachusetts Senate Debate, 9/16/96)

In 1996, Kerry Said, “You Can Change Your Mind On Things, But Not On Life-And-Death Issues.” (Timothy J. Connolly, “The ‘Snoozer’ Had Some Life,” [Worcester, MA] Telegram & Gazette, 7/3/96)

But, In 2002, Kerry Said He Supported Death Penalty For Terrorists. KERRY: “The law of the land is the law of the land, but I have also said that I am for the death penalty for terrorists because terrorists have declared war on your country.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 12/1/02)

On Military Experience As Credential For Public Office

Kerry: Service Should Not Be “Litmus Test” For Leadership. “Mr. President, you and I know that if support or opposition to the war were to become a litmus test for leadership, America would never have leaders or recover from the divisions created by that war. You and I know that if service or nonservice in the war is to become a test of qualification for high office, you would not have a Vice President, nor would you have a Secretary of Defense and our Nation would never recover from the divisions created by that war.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/08/92, p. S17709)

But Now Kerry Constantly “Challenges The Stature Of His Democratic Opponents” Over Their Lack Of Military Service. “And more than ever, Mr. Kerry is invoking his stature as a Vietnam veteran as he challenges the stature of his Democratic opponents -- none of whom, he frequently points out, have ‘worn the uniform of our country’ -- to withstand a debate with Mr. Bush on national security.” (Adam Nagourney, “As Campaign Tightens, Kerry Sharpens Message,” The New York Times, 8/10/03)

Ballistic Missile Defense

Kerry Called For Cancellation Of Missile Defense Systems In 1984 And Has Voted Against Funding For Missile Defense At Least 53 Times Between 1985 And 2000. (“John Kerry On The Defense Budget,” Campaign Position Paper, John Kerry For U.S. Senate, 1984; S. 1160, CQ Vote #99: Rejected 21-78: R 2-50; D 19-28, 6/4/85, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1160, CQ Vote #100: Rejected 38-57: R 6-45; D 32-12, 6/4/85, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1160, CQ Vote #101: Rejected 36-59: R 1-49; D 35-10, 6/4/85, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1160, CQ Vote #103: Rejected 33-62: R 28-22; D 5-40, 6/4/85, Kerry Voted Nay; H.J. Res. 465, CQ Vote #365: Motion Agreed To 64-32: R 49-2; D 15-30, 12/10/85, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 4515, CQ Vote #122: Ruled Non-Germane 45-47: R 7-42; D 38-5, 6/6/86, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 2638, CQ Vote #176: Motion Agreed To 50-49: R 41-11; D 9-38, 8/5/86, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2638, CQ Vote #177: Rejected 49-50: R 10-42; D 39-8, 8/5/86, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1174, CQ Vote #248: Motion Agreed To 58-38: R 8-37; D 50-1, 9/17/87, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1174, CQ Vote #259: Motion Agreed To 51-50: R 37-9; D 13-41, With Vice President Bush Casting An “ Yea “ Vote, 9/22/87, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2355, CQ Vote #124: Motion Agreed To 66-29: R 38-6; D 28-23, 5/11/88, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2355, CQ Vote #125: Motion Agreed To 50-46: R 38-7; D 12-39, 5/11/88, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2355, CQ Vote #126: Motion Rejected 47-50: R 38-6; D 9-44, 5/11/88, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2355, CQ Vote #128: Motion Rejected 48-50: R 6-39; D 42-11, 5/11/88, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 2355, CQ Vote #136: Motion Agreed To 56-37: R 9-34; D 47-3, 5/13/88, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 2355, CQ Vote #137: Motion Agreed To 51-43: R 38-5; D 13-38, 5/13/88, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 4264, CQ Vote #251: Motion Rejected 35-58: R 35-9; D 0-49, 7/14/88, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 4781, CQ Vote #296: Motion Agreed To 50-44: R 5-39; D 45-5, 8/5/88, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1352, CQ Vote #148: Motion Agreed To 50-47: R 37-6; D 13-41, 7/27/89, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 3072, CQ Vote #202: Rejected 34-66: R 27-18; D 7-48, 9/26/89, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 3072, CQ Vote #213: Adopted 53-47: R 39-6; D 14-41, 9/28/89, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2884, CQ Vote #223: Adopted 54-44: R 2-42; D 52-2, 8/4/90, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 2884, CQ Vote #225: Motion Agreed To 56-41: R 39-4; D 17-37, 8/4/90, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2884, CQ Vote #226: Motion Agreed To 54-43: R 37-6; D 17-37, 8/4/90, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 5803, CQ Vote #319: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 4739, CQ Vote #320: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1507, CQ Vote #168: Rejected 39-60: R 4-39; D 35-21, 7/31/91, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1507, CQ Vote #171: Motion Agreed To 60-38: R 40-3; D 20-35, 8/1/91, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1507, CQ Vote #172: Motion Agreed To 64-34: R 39-4; D 25-30, 8/1/91, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1507, CQ Vote #173: Rejected 46-52: R 5-38; D 41-14, 8/1/91, Kerry Voted Yea; H.R. 2521, CQ Vote #207: Motion Agreed To 50-49: R 38-5; D 12-44, 9/25/91, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2403, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 61-38: R 7-36; D 54-2, 5/6/92, Kerry Voted Yea; H.R. 4990, CQ Vote #108: Adopted 90-9: R 34-9; D 56-0, 5/21/92, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 3114, CQ Vote #182: Motion Rejected 43-49: R 34-5; D 9-44, 8/7/92, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 3114, CQ Vote #214: Rejected 48-50: R 5-38; D 43-12, 9/17/92, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 3114, CQ Vote #215: Adopted 52-46: R 39-4; D 13-42, 9/17/92, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 5504, CQ Vote #228: Adopted 89-4: R 36-4; D 53-0, 9/22/92, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1298, CQ Vote #251: Adopted 50-48: R 6-36; D 44-12, 9/9/93, Kerry Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 63, CQ Vote #64: Rejected 40-59: R 2-42; D 38-17, 3/22/94, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1026, CQ Vote #354: Motion Agreed To 51-48: R 47-6; D 4-42, 8/3/95, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1087, CQ Vote #384: Rejected 45-54: R 5-49; D 40-5, 8/10/95, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1087, CQ Vote #397: Passed 62-35: R 48-4; D 14-31, 9/5/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #399: Passed 64-34: R 50-3; D 14-31, 9/6/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 2126, CQ Vote #579: Adopted 59-39: R 48-5; D 11-34, 11/16/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #608: Adopted 51-43: R 47-2; D 4-41, 12/19/95, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1635, CQ Vote #157: Rejected 53-46: R 52-0; D 1-46, 6/4/96, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1745, CQ Vote #160: Rejected 44-53: R 4-49; D 40-4, 6/19/96, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1745, CQ Vote #187: Passed 68-31: R 50-2; D 18-29, 7/10/96, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 936, CQ Vote #171: Rejected 43-56: R 2-53; D 41-3, 7/11/97, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 1873, CQ Vote #131: Motion Rejected 59-41: R 55-0; D 4-41, 5/13/98, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1873, CQ Vote #262: Motion Rejected 59-41: R 55-0; D 4-41, 9/9/98, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 2549, CQ Vote #178: Motion Agreed To 52-48: R 52-3; D 0-45, 7/13/00, Kerry Voted Nay)

Kerry Then Claimed To Support Missile Defense. “I support the development of an effective defense against ballistic missiles that is deployed with maximum transparency and consultation with U.S. allies and other major powers. If there is a real potential of a rogue nation firing missiles at any city in the United States, responsible leadership requires that we make our best, most thoughtful efforts to defend against that threat. The same is true of accidental launch. If it were to happen, no leader could ever explain not having chosen to defend against the disaster when doing so made sense.” (Peace Action Website, “Where Do The Candidates Stand On Foreign Policy?” www.peace-action.org... Accessed 3/10/04)

Now Kerry Campaign Says He Will Defund Missile Defense. FOX NEWS’ MAJOR GARRETT: “Kerry would not say how much all of this would cost. A top military adviser said the Massachusetts Senator would pay for some of it by stopping all funds to deploy a national ballistic missile defense system, one that Kerry doesn’t believe will work.” KERRY ADVISOR RAND BEERS: “He would not go forward at this time because there is not a proof of concept.” (Fox News’ “Special Report,” 3/17/03)

View Of War On Terror

Kerry Said War On Terror Is “Basically A Manhunt.” “Kerry was asked about Bush’s weekend appearance on ‘Meet the Press’ when he called himself a ‘war president.’ The senator, who watched the session, remarked: ‘The war on terrorism is a very different war from the way the president is trying to sell it to us. It’s a serious challenge, and it is a war of sorts, but it is not the kind of war they’re trying to market to America.’ Kerry characterized the war on terror as predominantly an intelligence-gathering and law enforcement operation. ‘It’s basically a manhunt,’ he said. ‘You gotta know who they are, where they are, what they’re planning, and you gotta be able to go get ‘em before they get us.’” (Katherine M. Skiba, “Bush, Kerry Turn Focus To Each Other,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 2/13/04)

Two Weeks Later, Kerry Flip-Flopped, Saying War On Terror Is More Than “A Manhunt”. “This war isn’t just a manhunt – a checklist of names from a deck of cards. In it, we do not face just one man or one terrorist group. We face a global jihadist movement of many groups, from different sources, with separate agendas, but all committed to assaulting the United States and free and open societies around the globe.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At University Of California At Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 2/27/04)

Funding For Our Troops In Iraq
Kerry Pledged To Fund Reconstruction With “Whatever Number” Of Dollars It Took. NBC’S TIM RUSSERT: “Do you believe that we should reduce funding that we are now providing for the operation in Iraq?” SEN. JOHN KERRY: “No. I think we should increase it.” RUSSERT: “Increase funding?” KERRY: “Yes.” RUSSERT: “By how much?” KERRY: “By whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win. It is critical that the United States of America be successful in Iraq, Tim.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 8/31/03)

Then Kerry Voted Against Senate Passage Of Iraq/Afghanistan Reconstruction Package. “Passage of the bill that would appropriate $86.5 billion in fiscal 2004 supplemental spending for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill would provide $10.3 billion as a grant to rebuild Iraq, including $5.1 billion for security and $5.2 billion for reconstruction costs. It also would provide $10 billion as a loan that would be converted to a grant if 90 percent of all bilateral debt incurred by the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein has been forgiven by other countries. Separate provisions limit reconstruction aid to $18.4 billion. It also would provide approximately $65.6 billion for military operations and maintenance and $1.3 billion for veterans medical care.” (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay)

www.usorthem.org...


Its even harder to say how he has voted. How many votes did he miss last year. Case in point. Kerry is soft on defence and worse he can't make up his own mind. What he going to do when the bombs are falling? Call the French?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join