I would think that anyone smart enough to lead the most powerful country in the world would be smart enough to realize that the Kerry quote is a misspoken delivery of a somewhat bad joke. The last part was supposed to be "you get us stuck in Iraq." It was a reference to George Bush and his less than stellar academic performance. A difficult joke to deliver by someone with good timing and probably impossible for Kerry to do in the best of circumstances.
He tried to get pretty and he paid a little for it.
Clearly the Republicans chose to misinterpret it and act as if Kerry was speaking about the troops but I watched it and it was clear if you didn't want to misunderstand who he was speaking about-George Bush.
Seems humorous in a way, how the king of misspeaking would work so hard to make such a big deal about someone else misspeaking. But then I guess that was the best thing that had happened to Bush in several months so he had to go with it. Kerry has a long ways to go to give enough misstatements to make an entire desk calendar.
How about that other current "misspeak" where Bush told us right before the election that Rumsfeld was secure and right after the election a week later he was gone and the replacement was already picked out?
Anyone want to be offended at getting lied to? Or are we just used to it?
It really doesn't make sense, Bush could have maybe saved a Senator or two if he had simply told us before the election that Rumsfeld was gone, I think a few thousand people in the critical places might have taken that as a change of course and left their Republican in power, but he made the mistake of appearing to be set on course before the election and taking a sharp turn the next day.
Of course I don't know if the appointment of a former CIA director which most of the countries of the Middle East would simply see as the head of the secret police to head the Pentagon would appear to them to be a change of course. I'm not sure that I would see the former Dean of the George Bush School of Government a real change either. No, probably no real change at all.
Marv
He tried to get pretty and he paid a little for it.
Clearly the Republicans chose to misinterpret it and act as if Kerry was speaking about the troops but I watched it and it was clear if you didn't want to misunderstand who he was speaking about-George Bush.
Seems humorous in a way, how the king of misspeaking would work so hard to make such a big deal about someone else misspeaking. But then I guess that was the best thing that had happened to Bush in several months so he had to go with it. Kerry has a long ways to go to give enough misstatements to make an entire desk calendar.
How about that other current "misspeak" where Bush told us right before the election that Rumsfeld was secure and right after the election a week later he was gone and the replacement was already picked out?
Anyone want to be offended at getting lied to? Or are we just used to it?
It really doesn't make sense, Bush could have maybe saved a Senator or two if he had simply told us before the election that Rumsfeld was gone, I think a few thousand people in the critical places might have taken that as a change of course and left their Republican in power, but he made the mistake of appearing to be set on course before the election and taking a sharp turn the next day.
Of course I don't know if the appointment of a former CIA director which most of the countries of the Middle East would simply see as the head of the secret police to head the Pentagon would appear to them to be a change of course. I'm not sure that I would see the former Dean of the George Bush School of Government a real change either. No, probably no real change at all.
Marv
Upvote
0
