| Home | About Us | Login/Register | Email News Tips |

A liberal dose of news, national and local politics, commentary, opinions and common sense conversation…

McCain Takes on Clintons — Kerry Smacks McCain Down

by Pamela Leavey

John McCain took on the Clintons on Tuesday and accused former President Clinton, “of failing to act in the 1990s to stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons.” The assault came during a “news conference after a campaign appearance for Republican Senate candidate Mike Bouchard” and was backed up with what appears to be a guest post on right wing blog The Captain’s Quarters.

McCain is rumored to be the GOP frontrunner for ’08. He hit both Hillary and Bill Clinton with his bogus claims. It was like a preview for the ’08 race with Hillary also rumored to make a run for the White House. However, I’m not sure what response was garnered by the Clinton’s but John Kerry, the 2004 presidential nominee and too, a potential 2008 candidate, got into the mix and wasted no time in smacking McCain’s assertions down:

He must be trying to burnish his credentials for the nomination process,” said Kerry, who labeled McCain’s comments “flat politics and incorrect.”

“The truth is the Clinton administration knew full well they didn’t have a perfect agreement. But at least they were talking. At least we had inspectors going in and we knew where the (nuclear fuel) rods were. This way, we don’t know where the rods are, the rods are gone. There are no inspectors. Ask any American which way is better,” Kerry said.

Kerry was quick to the punch. As the Ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Asia Subcommittee, Kerry has been very clear that Bush’s North Korea policies are yet another failed effort.

6 Responses to “McCain Takes on Clintons — Kerry Smacks McCain Down”

  1. JK not standing for any lies, way to go sir. Keep up the pressure and never surrender!!

  2. johng, EXACTLY. You took the words right out of my mouth.

  3. Just another case of Kerry taking the high road because it’s the right thing to do – if he were a Rovite or a Repub he would have stood on the sidelines and said nothing knowing that his primary adversary (Hillary) was going to be negatively affected by the attack. Pushing politics aside, the Senator stood up and justified the position of his primary rival’s husband. This justifies his recent statements that he will never again let the other party have even a crack of daylight through which to smear any Dem or veteran of any party. With some, speaking truth to power still means something.

  4. The Clintons have responded. But they weren’t as quick as Kerry (who, if I recall, the Clintons were supposed to give him a lesson on “how to fight back”).

    With Kerry response only (18 hours ago):

    http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15210254/

    With Clinton response 1 hour ago:

    http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2552913&page=1

    On AOL, it contained all responses.

    http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/mccain-criticizes-clinton-on-north/20061010222909990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

  5. Javelin

    Exactly, for Kerry speaking truth to power is is a top priority. I doubt we’d see such a quick defense for him from those he defended.

  6. Absolutely Pamela. The Clintons’ were probably trying to figure out how to respond in the best manner (read : triangulate). Now, honestly, there’s some logic in that politically. And every candidate does that to some degree. But it is refreshing and maybe fortelling that one candidate knows how to reply within an hour, either because he doesn’t give a damn about the repercussions or that he is so tuned in to the public that he KNOWS how to say it right, immediately. The flame gets brighter every day IMHO.