Hey! Susie Y...Don't sugar coat it! How would you really feel with an admitted War Criminal as Commander in Chief?
2006-07-24 09:29:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
John Kerry has a terrible record of lying, changing his story or his affiliation, losing his integrity in the passion of his lie. And :: being married to a woman who is his piggy bank :: and the reason the Kennedy's resorted to a lobotomy for the sister that would have kept John out of the White House. A lobotomy is when they drill a hole in your skull and detach a part of your brain so you become a vegetable (for those of you who don't know). Mrs Kerry would be OK as a vegetable as she in about as smart as one already. The Kerry's are America's EMBARASSMENT ::: ranking right up there with the Clinton's and the Gore's. They have this lying and getting caught problem.
2006-07-24 10:44:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree... I hated that about his campaigning! He just kept saying how bad Bush's plan was, and how his plan was better. But did any of us ever hear a feasible and concrete plan come out of his mouth? Its easy to criticize someone for being wrong, its a lot harder to actually do it beter. Oh and I really hate how people are still sporting their Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers! The election was two years ago! They lost, stop resenting Bush's re-election and start supporting our country. We are all Americans... sometimes there is a president in office we like and agree with, and sometimes there is a president in office we would rather not have been elected. That's just part of democracy!
2006-07-24 09:21:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Legolas' Lover 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
John Kerry is so busy being John Kerry that he hasn't the time to think about something else. He probable theory McCain replaced right into a conflict hero beforehand he theory he wasn't. Who knows?
2016-10-15 04:02:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because the "idiot" John Kerry wouldn't have invaded Iraq and would have taken diplomatic steps to rein in Iran and N.Korea using co-operation with allies and influential parties in the affected areas. Bush just bulldozed in and thought he could use military superiority to carry out corporate policy. Worked well, didn't it? To bad we let the Bush Junta steal the election in 2000 or we wouldn't be in the mess we are in.
2006-07-24 09:13:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by iknowtruthismine 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
As a liberal, I have to say that if Kerry stood there, with his war record, and let Cheney and Bush run all over him (neither of whom have ANY war records), Kerry did not merit being the president
2006-07-24 09:10:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Kerry is right. We wouldn't be fighting terrorists in the Middle East if he were president. The terror battles would be fought in New York, Los Angeles, Washington D.C. , etc. where they belong.
2006-07-24 09:12:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by gtk 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
He would have been Prez while war was going on. He'd be stupid to say that. He'd actually make peace and a plan to stop it than do something retarded like Bush.
2006-07-24 09:10:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by vinible2006 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I guess you don't go for open ended non threatening questions? You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Your approach is not very effective unless you just want to p*** people off. That's not good.
2006-07-24 09:14:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by Ned 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
the war started in 2003,he did not run for pres. till 2004,You know he did fight for his country,that more than I can say about some people
2006-07-24 09:13:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋