|
Sure, a nice speech. He did stay on one consistent theme
that tied the whole thing together. For example:
"Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required."
(Unlike what I did in the senate, where I voted against
every military expenditure and every military action.
Do not be confusd about Iraq, "I was really voting just to
THREATEN the use of force. I did not vote to use force.'
"Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response. "
((Unlike what I did in the senate, where I advocated waiting
an additional 12 years, felling that 12 years wasn't long enough
to wait for Saddam to comply.)
"I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security."
(Unlike what I did in the senate, where I argued that our sovereignty
should be subject to the UN.)
"And I will build a stronger American military."
(Unlike what I did in the senate, where I voted against
body armor, fuel, ammo, and other necesities for our troops.)
"We will provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology to save their lives and win the battle."
(Unlike in the Senate, where I voted to not provide ammo for the
existing weapons, much less new weapons.)
"We will double our special forces to conduct anti-terrorist operations."
(Unlike what I did in the Senate ....
I'm actually suprised that he stayed consistent during the course of
a whole entire speech, he normally sways from side to side in the
course of a sentence. However, given that the one consistent point
he had was that he promises to do the exactly the opposite of
what he's always done his whole life, I'm not too sure how much stock
I'd put in those promises.
__________________
For historical display only. This information is not current:
support@bettercgi.com ICQ 7208627
Strongbox - The next generation in site security
Throttlebox - The next generation in bandwidth control
Clonebox - Backup and disaster recovery on steroids
|