Kerry on Bush's* trip to Bagdhad - paraphrasing . .

[msmcghee]

A nice touch for the troops . . unfortunately, this administration has a disasterous foreign policy and here's why . .

(Just heard on NPR - All Things Considered)

I think this showed Kerry to be a very smart candidate.

[maddezmom]

1. here's a good link to candidates comments

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/28/politics/campaigns/28DEMS.html?pagewanted=print&position=

edited to change format

[whathappened]

2. heard condee today

saying how surprized the troops were to see jr. , what troops , what i heard there was only 600 that seen him and no one esle new he was in country tell after he left , hoorah for the ones who missed little jr.

[pinkpops]

3. He flew into the airport

and saw - what - 300 or so of them. There are - what - 100,000 + over there, most of whom are in much more dangerous locations and didn't know he was there until he left. He might as well have been in Texas if not for the symbolic value, which is being manufactured - the symbolic meaning being - what ??? A nice touch for the troops - for a couple who now have some pictures of themselves with him - like now they've met Michael Jackson or something equally memorable.

[oasis]

4. He's very smart. The Foxbots are ready to pounce on any Democrat

who criticizes the visit. They are spinning the story that Dems generally disapprove and Bush is grandstanding, however, Fox news needs a high profile Dem to associate with their negative story.

[msmcghee]

5. Yes, it's smart, but also . .

. . he's right.

I would more easily fault him for not going to Bagdhad - and sitting on the porch at his ranch while Americans were dieing - on Thanksgiving Day - in some foreign war he had started. Rove certainly understood that.

By giving Bush* a little credit when he does something right - then Kerry has much greater credibility (with the muddy middle uncommitted voters) when he criticizes him (which kerry did immediately in the next sentence.)

Hopefully the other Dem candidates will see the wisdom in this approach and not give the media an excuse to show us as shrill whiners about everything Bush* does.

[oasis]

6. The ad which claims "Democrats attack Bush for attaking the terrorists"

Should now be challenged by Kerry as it was by Gen. Clark. The inaccuracy of the b.s. should not be given a pass. Some in the media question whether the ad is too strong without examining the specifics.

What Democrats don't support the war on terrorism? That's what someone with the stature of Kerry needs to ask Ed Gillespie.

[sandnsea]

7. He was first

His ad went up two days later, with press release.

"George Bush’s ad says he's being attacked for attacking the terrorists. No Mr. President, America is united against terror. The problem is you declared “mission accomplished” but you had no plan to win the peace, and handed out billions in contracts to contributors like Halliburton."

http://johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2003_1123.html

[oasis]

10. Thanks for the update. It seems Kerry 's positives are underreported

by the cable folk.

[blm]

8. Thanks, msmcghee...I missed that.

.

[Scott Lee]

9. Thank you, Mr. My-Vote-Wouldn't-Count-Anyway

You accurately nail McChimp for his lameass photo stunt. Now please explain to your adoring electorate why our votes won't count anyway (yours didn't, so why bother to cast it, right?).