1
   

Who knew Kerry was such a big Reagan supporter?

 
 
Reply Sat 9 Oct, 2004 03:49 am
Amazing, hearing Kerry praise President Reagan tonight. Apparently, Kerry believes President Reagan was outstanding in the leadership he displayed in the area of foreign policy.

Yet Kerry opposed Reagan at every turn:

"Now, here's why this is important today: Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry opposed all the key policies Reagan used to win a bloodless victory in the Cold War.

In his first Senate race in 1984, Kerry championed the nuclear freeze. In September 1985, two months before Reagan met Gorbachev in Geneva, when freezeniks held their own Geneva summit, Kerry was their star. "Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., keynote speaker for the Geneva freeze meeting," United Press International reported at the time, "told the activists that 'if it were not for the freeze movement, I am confident that the government of the United States would not be in Geneva today talking with its Soviet counterparts.'"

In August 1986, two months before Reagan met Gorbachev in Reykjavik, Kerry fought to pre-emptively scuttle SDI. After a measure to steeply reduce SDI funding failed in the Senate, Kerry, according to the Associated Press, "called Star Wars 'a cancer' and said 'what we must do is deny this program the funds that would enable this cancer on our nation's defense to grow any further.'"

What about Reagan's buildup of conventional weapons (which still benefits U.S. forces today)? "(C)andidate Kerry in 1984 said he would have voted to cancel many of them -- the B-1 bomber, B-2 stealth bomber, AH-64 Apache helicopter, Patriot missile, the F-15, F-14A and F-14D jets, the AV-8B Harrier jet, the Aegis air-defense cruiser, and the Trident missile system," the Boston Globe reported.

Is Kerry ready to be commander in chief? Voters will decide. But his record points to a reasonable conclusion: Had Kerry been president in the 1980s instead of Reagan, the West would not have won the Cold War when it did."


Link: http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=4892


Which just goes to show that Kerry will say anything, anywhere, at any time to curry favor with voters. The man has no principles, no core, and an ideology that can change at any time, depending on his audience.

Which kind of reassures me, in an ironic way. If Kerry is elected, and the masses believe strong conservative leadership is needed, Kerry will drop the left in a heartbeat to win reelection! Very Happy
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 798 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
princesspupule
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Oct, 2004 07:29 am
Funny, but I remember Reagan as throwing money into programs to intimidate Russia while continuing talks of detant, no preemptive strike as I'm sure Dubya would've shot their way... The couldn't match us, cash outlay to keep their programs going, and finally they were bankrupt and the Berlin wall came tumbling down... Wasn't that sort of how it happened...??? Confused

I don't think Kerry was so pro-Reagan as he is admiring his ability to keep talking and peacefully resolve situations with threats to our nation... Looking back, I'd have to say that Reagan was a saint, and brilliant, compared to Dubya...
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Oct, 2004 02:26 pm
princesspupule wrote:
Funny, but I remember Reagan as throwing money into programs to intimidate Russia while continuing talks of detant, no preemptive strike as I'm sure Dubya would've shot their way... The couldn't match us, cash outlay to keep their programs going, and finally they were bankrupt and the Berlin wall came tumbling down... Wasn't that sort of how it happened...??? Confused

I don't think Kerry was so pro-Reagan as he is admiring his ability to keep talking and peacefully resolve situations with threats to our nation... Looking back, I'd have to say that Reagan was a saint, and brilliant, compared to Dubya...


The same Left that is undermining Bush now tried to undermine President Reagan then. They did their best to attack Reagan and portray him as incompetent;

The same Left that claimed doom if the US went to the aid of Kuwait and tried to undermine President Bush I before Gulf War I.

The left-wingers tried their hardest to destabilize and demoralize the United States. Now, they are tring to claim they supported Reagan.

Give me a break. The liberals were on the wrong side of history then, just like they are on the wrong side of history now.

Libs wonder why they have no credibility.......
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Oct, 2004 08:15 pm
The don't wonder Lonevoice.....incomprehensibly, they seem to think they have credibility on all these issues. There is room, however, for honest differences of opinion. I respected the honorable conscientious objectors during Vietnam, and I respect honorable conscientious objectors now.

But I won't respect those who would rather see a defeat in Iraq and more dead soldiers than see Bush appear to succeed; those who are gleeful at each setback; those who are I believe encouraging the terrorists to do their worse and will greatly lengthen the time to success. This opinion is not directed to all the anti-war members of A2K as most are honorable in their dissent. But there is a constructive way and a destructive way to show dissent. Some I think haven't learned it yet and those put our armed forces at greater risk.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Oct, 2004 09:30 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
The don't wonder Lonevoice.....incomprehensibly, they seem to think they have credibility on all these issues. There is room, however, for honest differences of opinion. I respected the honorable conscientious objectors during Vietnam, and I respect honorable conscientious objectors now.

But I won't respect those who would rather see a defeat in Iraq and more dead soldiers than see Bush appear to succeed; those who are gleeful at each setback; those who are I believe encouraging the terrorists to do their worse and will greatly lengthen the time to success. This opinion is not directed to all the anti-war members of A2K as most are honorable in their dissent. But there is a constructive way and a destructive way to show dissent. Some I think haven't learned it yet and those put our armed forces at greater risk.

You mean the ones who were protesting the Vietnam war up untill the point when the draft was stopped?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Oct, 2004 10:10 pm
Well I wasn't thinking exaclty along those lines Baldimo. I just believe thee are constructive ways to express what one thinks without undermining the leadership and military in a time of war.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Oct, 2004 11:03 pm
What is more amazing is the fact the Ron Reagon, Ronald Reagan's son, is not supporting this president for reelection. Now, that's CURRENT news. Says alot more than Kerry's current verbal respects for President Reagan. A good legislator follows his conscience that is good for the country and not every bill the president supports.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Oct, 2004 11:04 pm
After all, presidents are human.
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Oct, 2004 11:46 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
What is more amazing is the fact the Ron Reagon, Ronald Reagan's son, is not supporting this president for reelection. Now, that's CURRENT news. Says alot more than Kerry's current verbal respects for President Reagan. A good legislator follows his conscience that is good for the country and not every bill the president supports.


So? Who cares who Ron Reagan is or is not supporting? Why should anyone care about his opinion?

If Ron had an opinion about his family, that would be worth hearing, if only to ascertain his perspective. Kind of like Patty Davis and her opinion about President Reagan.

But Ron Reagan's opinion on politics and candidates? Who gives a rat's ass?.......

How about something worthy, imposter?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Oct, 2004 12:17 am
I don't give a rat's ass either, because I'm not a liberal or a conservative. Just stating facts, sonny.
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Oct, 2004 02:12 am
And your 'fact' is what? That Ron Reagan's support of Kerry is "CURRENT news'?

Well, my cousin Jake says Nader is the real deal, so I'll go with him.... Rolling Eyes

WUHB........ Smile
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Oct, 2004 09:42 am
I really don't give a rat's ass how your cousin Jake votes, and that includes you!
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Oct, 2004 02:38 pm
Imposter, you are indeed an imposter.

I'm glad you do not care how Cousin Jake votes. Now you understand why I responded to the nonsense you posted about Ron Reagan.

Do you have anything else worth responding to? You know, how Kerry is pretending to be something he isn't?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Oct, 2004 03:38 pm
Just that Ron Reagan has more influence in this country than you, me, or your cousin Jake.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Oct, 2004 03:40 pm
I know I'm an imposter; after all, I chose that name for myself. So what's your point?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Who knew Kerry was such a big Reagan supporter?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/16/2024 at 12:41:30