Proposed Slogan for John Kerry

CBS PAINTS KERRY AS VICTIM, BUT BUSH USES KERRY’S OWN QUOTES

Painting Kerry as the poor little victim of Bush’s non-attack ads, NBC Today co-host Ann Curry on March 9 was “taken aback by Bush 'bashing his opponent' about a Senate vote (on intelligence funding) taken nine years ago – as if that is somehow out of bounds,” noted Geoff Dickens of the Media Research Center (MRC).

During a session with Tim Russert, Curry played a clip from Bush about how Kerry pushed for a cut in intelligence funding:

His bill was so deeply irresponsible that he didn’t have a single co-sponsor in the United States Senate. Once again, Senator Kerry is trying to have it both ways. He’s for good intelligence, yet he was willing to gut the intelligence services.

Curry later lamented: “An incumbent President bashing his opponent about a bill from nine years ago that never even came to a vote.”

As if Kerry is above and beyond ever being challenged for his patent dishonesty.

For instance, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann on his March 4 Countdown program, practically salivated over a story about a small number of relatives (from Teresa Heinz’s well-financed foundation), who complained about Bush’s use of the 9/11 images.

Quote: ‘It’s as sick as people who stole things out of the place.’ Some firefighters, some families of the victims of 9/11, protesting President Bush’s new campaign ad.

Not surprising, NBC’s liberal host Katie Couric spoke to Bush campaign adviser Karen Hughes on the March 4 Today Show, insinuating that all 9/11 families felt the same way.

But Couric intentionally neglected to mention quotes from a New York Daily News article of 9/11 relatives who support the Bush ads:

One September 11th widow told the [New York] Daily News this morning she was offended by the use of 9/11 images in these ads, saying quote, ‘After three thousand people were murdered on his watch, it seems to me that takes an awful lot of audacity. Honestly, it’s in poor taste.’ What’s your response to that?” Couric said snidely.

What’s more, NBC Nightly News White House correspondent David Gregory weaved his own liberal, anti-Bush opinions into the following segment about the Bush ads:

This is not the first time Mr. Bush has been accused of using the 9/11 attack for political gain. In May of 2002 the White House was criticized for allowing congressional Republicans to use a picture of the President on Air Force One speaking to the Vice President just hours after the attacks on New York and Washington. Political analysts say the President is once again walking a fine line.

As usual in the mainstream media’s collective mindset, Republicans are the unscrupulous ones; it’s never the Democrats, whose unfounded lies and misrepresentations become the bulk of their news coverage – which are typically used against Republicans. As if Democrats are never to be questioned, second-guessed or challenged on anything they say or do.

In effect, Democrats like Kerry can level any unsubstantiated charge they want (i.e., Kerry’s calling Republicans “the most crooked, lying group I have ever seen”) and never have to worry about being challenged by their media allies.

To date, Kerry has never been questioned about his childish rant against the GOP. But if a Republican had said the same thing, the media elite would be demanding an apology (that they still have never demanded from Kerry). Now, Hillary Clinton, one of the most dishonest politicians in Washington, is actually backing Kerry’s asinine statement. So look for Kerry and Hillary’s media buddies to run with this story without challenge).

In yet another example of leftist media bias, when Kerry recently threatened to send his lynch mob of liberal lawyers down to Florida the day after the November election to challenge the results (if they aren’t to his liking), the media elite has already ignored Kerry’s duplicity in his premeditated, Gore-style hijacking of the Florida electorate.

Again, if a Republican had made the same threat, the media elite would be accusing them of trying to “steal the election,” even though the media elite ignored revelations that Gore was accused of voter fraud in preventing over 10,000 military votes from arriving in the U.S. because Gore knew they’d likely be Republican votes for Bush. Now, Kerry wants complete control over the Florida election results – and the media elite could care less.

 

KERRY’S SECRET CASH COW – THE HEINZ KETCHUP FORTUNE

Accordingly, Teresa Heinz recently told NPR that if need be, she would find a way to circumvent campaign finance laws beyond her allotted $2,000 donation, warning that she wouldn’t be averse to squeezing her multi-billion dollar ketchup bottle to repel what she perceives as Bush’s “personal attacks.” But don’t look for CNN, The Times or Dan Rather to expose the Kerry’s financial treachery.

Heinz’s planned political heist is reminiscent of the recent antics of billionaire George Soros. A staunch Democrat and self-professed Bush-hater, Soros vowed – and even said he’d make it his mission in life – to go completely broke, if it meant defeating Bush this fall. But the media elite has once again looked the other way on this one.

Moreover, the leftist media still covered for Kerry when he tried to politicize Bush’s recent visit to a New York City memorial ceremony. In fact, the MRC said ABC’s Charles Gibson used Bush’s visit to parrot liberal complaints about 9/11 images in the Bush ad: “Gibson claimed the ad had “ignited” controversy and debate but didn’t tell viewers that the complaints were from a small group of liberals and a pro-Kerry union.”

Kerry has also been trying to make political hay out of Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe’s bogus AWOL charge that Bush was absent during some of his service in the National Guard.

According to a March 7 article in the UK Telegraph, in a Bill Clinton-like draft-dodging move, Kerry was actually the one trying to avoid his military responsibilities.

UK Telegraph’s New York reporter Charles Laurence wrote that Kerry tried to defer his military service for a year, according to a newly rediscovered newspaper article in a Harvard University newspaper:

"He wrote to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s,” Laurence reported.

"The revelation appears to undercut Sen. Kerry’s carefully-cultivated image as a man who willingly served his country in a dangerous war - in supposed contrast to President Bush, who served in the Texas National Guard and thus avoided being sent to Vietnam."

Laurence added that when the Telegraph tried to contact Kerry headquarters to give the Massachusetts Senator a chance to confirm or deny the story, their phone calls were never returned.

Definitely, Kerry has the willing accomplices of The Times, CNN and Dan Rather, as well as other media elite, to do his propagandizing in a calculated effort to try to take out Bush this fall. But then again, that’s all the Left has going for them – blatant lies, distortions and dirty campaign tricks as they try to slant public opinion against Bush.

In other words, Kerry can run on his trumped-up record, but Bush cannot run on his admirable success in winning two separate wars? – that has been the defining moment of his presidency. But to the media elite, Bush is being political and Kerry is not.

KERRY CALLED FOR WMD HUNT IN 2002; CNN CALLS IT “FRUITLESS”

Speaking of media leftists running damage control for the Democrats, although Kerry declared in 2002 that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and needed to be stopped, a CNN promo for an upcoming interview with U.S. enemy Hans Blix, said: “What does he think about our fruitless search for WMDs?” By editorializing even its promos, CNN displays their utter contempt for Bush – and favor for Kerry.

In the long run, it’s Bush who constantly has to defend himself, while the Democrats get the mikes, the sound bites, the air time and the prominent news coverage, as leftist portals like CNN treat their fellow Democrats as royalty, as well as trustworthy news sources.

For example, CNN anchor Fredricka Whitfield started one of her March 13 segments by suggesting that Bush and the Republicans were “attacking” Kerry, while the Democrats only wanted answers about Bush’s supposed “credibility” problem. Apparently, CNN believes that their beloved Democrats’ proven lack of credibility can never be questioned.

But with Bush and the GOP – which CNN obviously loathes, it’s fair game, without any objectivity, fairness or balance. No wonder Fox News is number one in the ratings. People are sick and tired of the Dan Rathers of the news industry that repeatedly distort and tilt the news in the Democrats’ favor, while always finding fault with Republicans.

For instance, on last Thursday’s NBC Nightly News, Tom Brokaw blathered: “The Bush-Cheney campaign is out tonight with its first ad attacking Kerry by name. The new ad, which will begin airing tomorrow in 18 battleground states, calls Kerry quote, ‘wrong on taxes, wrong on defense.’ A radio version of the ad will also run in select markets.”

According to the MRC, Brokaw avoided portraying Kerry as the one who made a baseless allegation about criminal conduct. Instead, Brokaw highlighted how Kerry, standing in front of a group of U.S. Senators, “lit into what he called ‘Republican hit squads’ specializing in ‘trying to destroy people.’

“The previous day, a wireless mike that Kerry was wearing picked up his comment that his opponents are quote, ‘the most crooked, lying group I have ever seen.’ And Kerry won’t take that back.”

(In another classic, Clinton-style pathological flip-flop, Kerry on Monday morning hypocritically accused Bush of not supplying our troops with body armor, when it was Kerry who voted against sending it to Iraq. Bush had already included the request for body armor in the $87 billion earmarked for Iraq, which Kerry also voted against.)

 

KERRY KNEW ABOUT 9/11 BOSTON HIJACKING PLAN YET DID NOTHING

Speaking of Kerry’s apathy concerning the war on terror, according to Washington investigative reporter Paul Sperry, Kerry often boasts how he “sounded the alarm on terrorism years before 9/ 11,” referring to his 1997 book, The New War.

But Kerry didn’t blast it when it really counted, Sperry wrote – four months before the hijackings, when he was hand-delivered evidence of serious security breaches at Logan International Airport, with specific warnings that terrorists could exploit them:

"Former FAA security officials say the Massachusetts senator had the power to prevent at least the Boston hijackings and save the World Trade Center and thousands of lives, yet he failed to take effective action after they gave him a prophetic warning that his state’s main airport was vulnerable to multiple hijackings,” Sperry wrote in the March 15 edition of the New York Post.

Again, as Kerry continues to accuse Bush of “misleading America” into the war in Iraq, the Kerry media cabal has flatly refused to expose Kerry’s treasonous dereliction of duty in responding to a tip that could have prevented the hijackings at Logan International Airport. Much like Clinton’s fear of racial profiling, Kerry did nothing as well.

 

So, RS7, your bias is ridiculous as well as predictable. Liberals can't stand the facts.

There's a lot more. Read the whole article:

http://www.intellectualconservative...rticle3239.html

 

"Kerry’s treasonous dereliction of duty"

Nothing like objective journalism.

 

Bottom line is Kerry had direct influence to make security changes that would have prevented the two WTO planes from hijackers that were armed.

And this articel is the mild version. Kerry was contacted numerous times and the evidence, video tapes of the security flaws, was always "being reviewed." They were completely ignored.

 

So Kerry is the only person who had direct influence to make security changes?

What of the FAA? What of American Airlines themselves? What of the immigration department?

Hell, it all happened under Bush's watch, so isn't he ultimately responsible since he had the power to change it too.

The bottom line is this:

Kerry may not have done something he could have, that is true of all of us, but this doesn't absolve Bush of having misled the country into war in Iraq.

 

You really should do some research before you post.

What do you think... it was some nobody traveler that noticed the security flaws and then tried to warn Kerry?

It was Brian Sullivan, a special agent for the Federal Aviation Administration. Sullivan wrote Kerry a letter detailing FAA failures and the threat they cause for the American people.

LOL! You are TOO FUNNY!
----------------------------------------
Kerry, in 1997, "supported unilateral military operations to unseat Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Appearing on CNN's "Crossfire," on Nov. 12, 1997, the great internationalist even declared that the same UN approval he now preaches for on campaign stops wouldn't be necessary for then-President Bill Clinton to launch an offensive against Saddam's regime. "The administration is making it clear they don't even need the UN security council to sign off on a material breach...so furthermore, I think the United States has always reserved the right and will reserve the right to act in its best interests."

He went on to criticize Germany, France, and Russia, asking where their "backbone" was in standing against Hussein.

Kerry's 1997 rhetoric sounds vaguely similar to someone from the present day. Who could that be? Why, President Bush, that's who. So, the lesson is, if a Democrat is in office, Saddam is fair game, but if a Republican is in office, we're going to war for Halliburton.

 

So the FAA was failing to do their job in Sullivan's opinion, and it is Kerry's fault that 911 happened?

You really should do some thinking before you post.

 

Can one go any higher up or cut any more red tape then going directly to a powerful US Senator from the state that the airport in question is located in? I think not.