10 Questions for John Kerry

This is from RWN

10 Questions For John Kerry
I’ve long thought that the mainstream media does a lousy job of asking pertinent questions to candidates for office, particularly Democratic candidates. In fact, they do such a terrible job of it, that I believe I can come up with 10 questions in just 15 minutes that will be better than any 10 questions the New York Times, the LA Times, The WAPO, CNN, MSNBC, etc, etc, etc, will ask in any one interview with Kerry all during the primary season.

  1. Conservatives claim your voting record is to the left of Ted Kennedys. Are you a liberal? Do you think your political views compare with those of Ted Kennedy?

  2. Given that every commanding officer you ever had in Vietnam says you are unfit to be President, do you think voters can still trust your judgement on national defense when your own commanding officers in Vietnam don’t?

  3. In 1984, you recommended the cancellation of the B1 bomber, the cruise missile, MX missile, Trident submarine, Patriot air defense missile, F15 fighter plane, Sparrow missile, stealth bomber and Pershing II missile among other programs. Do you think we’re lucky you didn’t get your way back then or do you believe we’d be better off today without those weapons?

  4. You said you’re going to treat the war on terrorism “primarily” as a “law-enforcement action”? Wasn’t that exactly the sort of policy that left us vulnerable to Al-Qaeda on 9/11?

  5. Do you feel ashamed that your US Senate testimony, which was based in part on the testimony of people who turned out to be frauds, was quoted to our POWS in Vietnam by their interrogators in an attempt to break their will?

  6. Do you think the war in Iraq was worth it? I’d like a one word answer, “yes” or “no” please.

  7. Given that you’ve missed more than 80% of your votes so far this year, do you think that you’ve adequately served the people of Massachusetts as their Senator during 2004? Follow-up question, do you think the average person who works a job in America would deserve a promotion if he simply chose to be absent 80% of the time from his job?

  8. You’ve criticized George Bush for high gas prices. Do you think that’s fair given that you supported a 50 cent tax increase on gas at one point? Follow-up: would you still support such a tax increase and if not, why has your view changed?

  9. During a debate back in January, you said that the threat of terrorism against America has been exaggerated. So would it be fair to say that you believe the threat of terrorist attacks against our country is minimal? Do you feel that another 9/11 or terrorist attack with WMD is out of the question at this point?

  10. Do you think it’s fair to criticize President Bush because we haven’t found stockpiles of WMD in Iraq when you yourself unequivocally and on multiple occasions said that Saddam Hussein has WMDs?

They are good questions that I think would help everyone make up their mind.

That is a great idea! It made me think of a similar questionare for Bush.

  1. Did you in fact snort cocaine in the 70’s? Yes or no answer please.

  2. Were you in fact convicted of two driving under the influence charges in the 70’s and spend time in jail for either of those offenses?

  3. Were you in fact AWOL from the Alabama National Guard? Yes or no answer please!

  4. Has Haliburton been given lucrative contracts in Iraq due to its relationship with past CEO and current Vice President Dick Cheney? Yes or no answer please!

  5. Did you in fact have an agenda to invade Iraq before 9/11 ever happened?

  6. After 9/11 did you intentionally manipulate the American people to influence them to think Saddam Hussien was the one who orchestrated or had ties to 9/11? Yes or no answer please!

  7. Are you going to use the threat of a terrorist attack to try and halt the upcoming Presidential election?

  8. Are you aware of or did you order the destruction of your National Guard service record?

  9. Are you using the gay marriage and stem cell research issues as a tool to cement the religious vote?

  10. Were any of your Oil business ventures a success or did you have to get bailed out of all of them?

You should also ask him, do you stand by your senate testimony that “90% of U.S. soldiers are constantly high?”


Those are ten very good questions that you will never see asked by the liberal media! And unlike Elkhntr1 questions they were mostly policy related. I think maybe three of Elks were even remotely related to policy.

F’in beautiful, Elkhntr1!!

Such biased and provocative questions don’t really do much good?


Excellent questions.



[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
That is a great idea! It made me think of a similar questionare for Bush.

  1. Did you in fact snort cocaine in the 70’s? Yes or no answer please.[/quote]

A; No, I did not. This was merely a rumor that was started by my detractors and opponents.

Whether you believe it or not, that’s what he’d say, then what? Unlike the questions posed to Kerry, you can’t corroborate these. All you are doing is floating out a suggestion, not asking about facts. It’s like asking, “Isn’t it true that you once beheaded a man and ate his brains?” Well, no, but the question suggests the answer.

Again, I’m not sure what the truth is here. It seems to me that if he had been, someone would have found a record somewhere, especially considering these are public records.

A: No.

Not a very good question. Besides, when you hint that he was AWOL and then ask about military records, you’re just going to undermine your own position.

A: No.

The rest of that answer, had you let him finish would be, “In fact, Haliburton is one of the few companies which has sufficient capital and infrastructure to take on a project that large. Furthermore, their extensive middle east contacts make them an excellent option. Finally, it is quite clear that Dick Chenny no longer has any financial ties to Haliburton. While it is true that he is friends with many of their board members, he is also close friends with the board members of many other boards of various oil companies, both domestically and abroad.”

A: No, at least nothing beyond what was already in place. Remember that America has had a presence in Iraq since 1991, as we have agreed, without UN funding, to enforce the UN created No-Fly Zone. During that time, many of our planes have come under attack, resulting in appropriate action being taken by both President Bush, then President Clinton. Furthermore, ever since 1991, the Pentagon has monitored Iraqi movement and maintained plans for an invasion should the unfortunate situation with Kuwait arise again.

Seriously, did you think that the Pentagon simply forgot about them after 1991? Did you think that Clinton wasn’t aware of every move a Iraqi tank made? You think that in the event that Hussein did use a chemical weapon on the Kurds, we weren’t ready to hit the button and unleash the war machine? You think we maintain the No-Fly Zone just to get out piolots some needed air time? Come on, the plans are there and ready to go at a moment’s notice.

Oh, and you can bet there’s already been meetings on an invasion of North Korea, Iran, Syria, and China, not to mention basic plans for an invasion of the Soviet Union, Saudi Arabia, and about 50 other countries as well. Hello McFly!

A: No.

And if you let him finish…

“If you read the bi-partisan report on the intelligence leading up to the war, which was signed by every single member, it clearly states that all of the information given to me suggested that Iraq indeed did have weapons of mass distruction. This is the same information which was given to the U.N., the Senate, Great Britian, and a host of others. It’s unfortunate, in fact, it’s a tragedy, that it occurred like that, and it is something we are going to change. Also, if you asked Iraqis today if they are better off without the mass graves, the torture chambers, and basic human needs such as water and electricity not being used as political weapons, I think they would all say they are.”

[b]A: This is simply a trap put in by the detractors. If I point out that there are threats, then I’m using it for political reasons. If I don’t, then I’m ignoring the truth.

I tell you what I am doing with it. I’m doing my job. I’m doing what the American people should expect out of me. I’m doing whatever I can to make sure that this country doesn’t have to wake up to another morning like that dredful morning on September 11th.

So, if you call doing your job to the best of your abilities a way of getting re-elected, then, yeah, yeah I’m guilty. But I was also guilty when I passed those tax cuts. I was also guilty when I went after Al Queda. If you want to call me guilty of doing my job, then go ahead. It’s a lot better than being guilty of ignoring it.[/b]

[b]A: Obviously, I’m aware of it. It hit basically every newspaper in America. Everyone’s aware of it. Did I order it, no. I’ve made them public for years, so it’s clear that I have nothing to hide. If I even had the power to make that happen, which I don’t, and actually wanted to do it, which I never have, I would have done it four years ago.

Besides, think about it. What’s in it for me to do it? If they get shredded, then everyone assumes it was me and I have no way of exculpating myself. I bear all of the downside. Now, what about my critics? Well, if they get shredded, they win. If they don’t, then everyone can read that I have a fantastic record. So, you tell me, who’s really got more incentive to do something like that.[/b]

A: One would have to be ignorant of politics to think so. The religious right has always been with republicans. There’s no reason to play to them. The religious vote has been “cemented” in for 30 years. No, I’m doing it because I believe it is the right thing to do. I’m doing it because I believe that it violates certain principles held by me a large portion of the American public. Also, the gay marriage amendment is an issue of who should make the decision. I say that it should go to the American people and the states. My opponents want the judges to make the decision for you.

A: Well, that depends on how you define success. Without going in too much depth, many of my companies were used as tax shelters or methods of shifting assets for other larger corporations. We were often used to allow other corporations to raise revenue or adjust their earnings as their boards saw fit. So, in that sense, yes, we were a major success.

Honestly, I’m not sure if this last one is true, but I had heard that many of his companies were used for such purposes. It’s quite common. And just because most people don’t understand it, doesn’t make it evil.

The point is, most of your quesions are not fact driven, but are merely methods of suggesting one thing when something else is true. You must have attended the Michael Moore school of thought. If you use a leading question which cannot possibly be backed by evidence (such as thoughts, motivations, or opinions), you can’t possibly “un-ring” the bell that suggests some form of impropriety.

At least all of the questions posed to John Kerry could be verified somehow or not just quickly explained away.

Those are great questions to ask Kerry. But, it doesn’t really matter because Bush is going to win anyway. I have bet on the presidential elections since 1992, and have never lost. (You libs, that means I voted and bet on Clinton.)
I’ve already got my money on the Bush ticket. The democrat party has become moribund in the last 4 years, and with Hilary soon to be the party hopeful, the future of the party looks ominous.

Libs, remember this post in November, because I surely will.

I think you could and would rationalize or justify any of the Kerry questions as well if he were your man! You can label my questions anyway you want to, but the fact is those are the questions myself and many other Americans want the answers too!

I think Cory answered them well and based his answers on logical thought.

I don’t dislike Kerry. At least I didn’t before the campaign. I would just like to know what his position is on certain issues. I watched him on 60 minutes and to be perfectly frank, his main campaign plank is “I am not Bush”. That’s not enough for me and I don’t think for the rest of the nation.

My suspicion is that rhetoric will only last him until the convention. He has to be for something and against something to lead the nation.

I thought those questions would be thought provoking?

Elk if you can rationalize them go ahead and do it. Show us what Kerry would most likely answer.

Vegita ~ Prince of all Sayajins

These forums never cease to amaze me. I don’t think that one of these arguments were supported with even a shred of factual documentation. The questions asked for Bush were insanely stupid. Logically it would make no difference if Bush did sniff some nose candy because that is irrelevant to his aptitude for politics. I would also assume that you have payed to watch movies of known cocaine users without any reservation so why would you critize an individual for supporting a man who was alledged, not known, to have sniffed coke. But can we lay off the pedantical, illogical, comments that lead to the intellectually impotent to exercise and entertain subjective, bias, and emotive comments which have no place in open debate and please quit lashing out in a cowardic manner from the safegaurd of a computer screen. It truly is pathetic. At least support claims with websites, quotes from speeches.

I hate to say that Kerry was well documented in 1998 speaking against the Iraqi regime and their iminent threat to western civilization. Bill Clinton Supported the war against Iraq and this was well documented in a recent Time Life interview. He even quoted " I have defended the president many of times against the left."

So please, can there be at least some intelligent arguments and debate in these forums. I don’t believe it to be ironic or wrongly accused when people say tht body builders are nothing more than muscleheads. I think that you are better than this guys. Just quit the personally fortifying pretense and just objectively discuss the issue. Even if you believe one to be an idiot still give him respect enough to listen and respond intelligable. when you attack the intelligence of someone else you only nullify the credence of your own statements. Who wants to listen to that. A broken clock is still right two times a day. Just have respect for each other because we are all wanting the same thing, a better country. So if you are wrong about your view, will you still defend it for the sake of pride or is it not about us but rather about this country. At least patronize me that far. And if you are right, than be confident in that.

The original 10 questions are full of shit, so the premise that these questions are somehow better than the questions being asked is also full of shit.

  1. Kerry’s record in the Senate supposedly more liberal.

If you had any political knowledge you would know this is not true, as Kennedy is more liberal than Kerry by far. Kerry is a moderate, he is certainly NOT more liberal than Kennedy. The rankings that everyone pushing this myth keeps repeating are not accurate.

  1. Every commanding officer says he is unfit to be president.

First of all I’m calling bullshit on this basic premise. I don’t believe that 'every commanding officer" has called Kerry unfit to be president, and if they did, ON WHAT BASIS?

Second of all, even if they did say it NOW, back in Viet Nam Kerry got high marks, meaning that these officers are just playing partisan politics.

Big deal! Do you want me to post the quotes from Bush’s Harvard Business School professor saying that in Harvard, Bush was an arrogant asshole and a shitty student who bragged that his family connections would be his meal ticket?

Your 10 Questions are about as fair as a sucker punch in the nuts.

They are not mine. Read the credit. It was made to spur debate.

Argue the point not the person…it identifies you as a member of the left too easily.

Here’s a list that’s about as fair as your list:

What Should George Bush Do, Now That We Know He Lied About Iraq Being an Imminent Threat?

  1. Bush should be impeached.

  2. Bush should step down and let Cheney take over. Hell, he does most of the thinking anyway.

  3. Bush should do the honorable thing and commit Hari Kari.



Since Kerry voted for the war on the same information that Bush was given by the CIA I suppose he too should resign.

In fact, since all (or most) voted for the war because of the weak CIA info I guess that Congress should resign.

Pull back the hate thing man!

[quote]Lumpy wrote:

  1. Kerry’s record in the Senate supposedly more liberal.

Lumpy - you really need to hold on for a minute.

There’s nothing supposed about Kerry’s voting record - when he actually shows up in Washington to cast a vote.

He is left of Kennedy based on his voting history. He is left of Cankles Clinton.

You just keep those blinders on.


My God, man. The Americans for Democratic Action, a left-liberal think-tank, has Kerry at a career average of higher than 90 (out of 100).

And suddenly, I’m forced to ask:

What’s so wrong with being a liberal? Why are Kerry’s supporters so desperately trying to distance him from that label? Is there something wrong with being called a liberal?

What are you scared of with the title of ‘liberal’?

Lumpy, don’t use the word ‘know’ in any context refering to you. You don’t know anything, save that which isn’t so. Superficial cut and paste bullshit is not knowledge. Those are fair, if a bit leading, questions. A skilled politician, like, say, Bill Clinton, could hit more than half of them out of the park.

Then again, they all depend on what is is, don’t they?

Are you so dense that you can’t figure out that leading a small boat around in the Mekong Delta doesn’t alone qualify you to be president? That maybe the intervening thirty years of life, you know, or most probably you don’t, has changed perspectives and opinions?
What’s wrong with asking a candidate if he calls himself a liberal? You can’t ask Dubbya if he considers himself conservative? Is that hitting below the belt?

Why don’t you have that Wilson character have his wife write a memo on where he can find you a clue, and then deny she wrote it and that one solitary clue was not to be found on your behalf anyway.