John Kerry was absent 76% (38/49) of the time during the public senate intellignece commitee hearings from 1993-2000. The year following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing Mr. Kerry was absent for every single meeting (that is 100% absence people).

What is Kerry's attendence record for the closed hearings? Kerry's administration admits that he wasn't there for the public hearings and claims he was there for the private hearings. Yet, they WON'T release the attendence records. Why not? If he was there, he has nothing to hide. Don't worry all, they are currently being leaked and will be available soon.

How can someone that was hardly ever at the intelligence commitee hearings which he was a member from 1993-2000, claim to know how to reform the nations intelligence?

The year after the '93 WTC bombing Kerry wanted to slash defense spending ANOTHER 4 BILLION dollars, which had already been cut by 18 BILLION! 1 BILLION of that coming to slash intelligence funding which was already cut 13% since 1989. It would have cut defense spending nearly 25 BILLION in 5 years. It was actually nicknamed the Kerry Amendment.

No wonder why this amendment was shot down 75-20 with 5 not voting. 70% of the DEMOCRATS said no on this bill, including TED KENNEDY.

In an unmistakable reference to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, Mr. DeConcini (who is the Democratic chairman of the Senate's Select Committee on Intelligence) observed, "We no longer seem immune from acts of terrorism in the United States." Arguing against Mr. Kerry's amendment, Mr. DeConcini warned his colleagues: "We have to stay ready. It makes no sense for us to close our eyes to developments around the world which could ultimately save U.S. lives and resources."

Democratic Sen. Daniel Inouye, chairman of the Senate's defense appropriations subcommittee, was even more harsh. Foreshadowing the eventual 75-20 vote against Mr. Kerry's amendment, which even 70 percent of Democrats opposed, including Sen. Ted Kennedy, Mr. Inouye asserted that Mr. Kerry's proposed $4 billion defense cut was "simply unsupportable."

Citing no less than the support of Bill Clinton, Mr. Inouye rebuked Mr. Kerry for his attempt to unilaterally eliminate the Trident D-5 submarine-missile program. On the Senate floor, Mr. Inouye charged Mr. Kerry with being shortsighted by cutting the Titan 4 missile-launch system, which was "the only system that can launch, for example, MILSTAR satellites, defense support program satellites and certain classified payloads."

Echoing Mr. DeConcini, Mr. Inouye asserted that Mr. Kerry's attempt to cut $1 billion from the intelligence budget "would severely hamper the intelligence community's ability to provide decision-makers and policy-makers with information on matters of vital concern to this country."

Is this really the guy you want to lead this country in a post 9/11 era?

Oh BTW- want to talk about Edwards? Despite his office being just across the hall from the Senate Judiciary Committee chambers, John Edwards has the worst attendance record of any committee member since he joined it three years ago. During the 107th Congress in 2001 and 2002 he attended 10 of the 30 business meetings that were held after he joined the committee in July 2001. His 33 percent average attendance was half the 70 percent average for all committee members. In the 108th Congress in 2003-04, Edwards attended three of 34 business meetings — worst on the committee — or 9 percent. The average for all committee members was 69 percent, or almost eight times higher. Edwards did not stay for all of the meetings he did attend. Committee records show his votes were recorded "by proxy" at some of those meetings. For 2003-04, Edwards attended nine of 121 (7 percent) total committee meetings.

You, sir, make a VERY fine point about how much of a piece of crap Kerry is. I don't want him as my leader. You know he probably wanted to take the money from the defense and intel budgets and give it all to those low lifes who refuse to work and live off WELFARE when they are completely capable to getting a job but are too lazy. I'm just ranting sorry. But our country would be in SERIOUS jeopardy if Kerry made office. The way i see it, if Kerry wins, we lose the war on terror. Chalk one up in the W column for Al Qaeda. Bush is their number one enemy and they want him out of office so they can go back to terrorizing at will.

But can Kerry possibly be worse than this?

http://www.majorityreportradio.com/weblog/archives/Bush%20-%20Tribal%20Sovereignty.mp3

LOL. not fair. that was a hard question.....

Just trying to keep it light. There's no need to bash anyone, it's counter productive, and the reason why there are far fewer political discussions than arguments. For a good discussion, check out this thread - http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=23686&highlight=news
Beware - lots of reading.

good point.

"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/multimedia/foolbush.mov

so you have nothing to say so you resort to irrelevant badgering?