But Kerry made it clear in the debate that all of his statements on Iraq are perfectly reconcilable if you interpret him, not sympathetically, but merely fairly. If there were big, irremoveable inconsistencies in Kerry's statements, you can be sure that Bush would have had at least one at the ready last night. But he didn't.
In the unlikely event that "Kerry v Kerry" gains traction, the natural response is to point to the many times that Bush has changed course for political reasons (Dept of Homeland Security, tariffs, 9/11 commission for starters).
The best response is to say"If George Bush could defend his policies, he wouldn't have to stoop to name-calling. The flipflop thing is his way of avoiding a discussion of his performance. Bush has mislead us, got us into a mess, and has no idea how to fix things. So he goes to name-calling."
But Kerry made it clear in the debate that all of his statements on Iraq are perfectly reconcilable if you interpret him, not sympathetically, but merely fairly. If there were big, irremoveable inconsistencies in Kerry's statements, you can be sure that Bush would have had at least one at the ready last night. But he didn't.
In the unlikely event that "Kerry v Kerry" gains traction, the natural response is to point to the many times that Bush has changed course for political reasons (Dept of Homeland Security, tariffs, 9/11 commission for starters).
Posted by son volt | Link to this comment | 10- 1-04 10:39 AM
The best response is to say"If George Bush could defend his policies, he wouldn't have to stoop to name-calling. The flipflop thing is his way of avoiding a discussion of his performance. Bush has mislead us, got us into a mess, and has no idea how to fix things. So he goes to name-calling."
Posted by wonkie | Link to this comment | 10- 1-04 11:03 AM