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