 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« "On The Ground In Iraq..." | Main | Economy News Roundup » June 3, 2004He Was Against It Before He Was For ItDan Spencer notes another instance where John Kerry talks tough about national security, but doesn't vote that way. Kerry, the only Senator not to vote for the Project BioShield Act, spent today telling anyone who would listen (i.e. the mainstream media) that the U.S. is not adequately prepared for Bioterrorism.Just two weeks ago, 99 senators voted for the legislation, which included new funding for the development and delivery of new medical countermeasures against bio-terrorism attacks, including funding to purchase vaccines and other therapies as soon as experts believe that they can be made safe and effective; funding for new National Institutes of Health programs to speed research and development on medical countermeasures, including more rapid hiring of technical experts, and new FDA emergency use authorization to permit the effective use of such treatments in an emergency, if alternative treatments are not available. President Bush proposed the legislation and 99 Senators - every Republican and all but one Democrat - voted to make you safer in the event of a bio-terror attack. Bio-terror preparedness. Kerry voted against it. Before he campaigned for it. Posted in Campaign Season
| Linked By |
Please support HobbsOnline by doing your online shopping at Amazon.com Comments
Mr. Kerry's vote doesn't matter. There is no defense against bioterrorism. Posted by: SemiPundit at June 3, 2004 10:16 AMThat may be the most idiotic comment you have ever posted, Semi. Of course the vote mattered - 99 Senators agreed that it made sense to increase funding for counter-measures to deal with bio-terror attacks. Bio-terror is a medical attack, it can be fought against using medical means. Drugs. Antidotes. Treatments. 99 senators voted to increase funding for that bio-terror preparedness, Kerry didn't. Posted by: Bill Hobbs at June 3, 2004 10:31 AMEven if Semi was correct, it just goes to show the amount of Flip-Flopping Kerry is capable of. If there is no defense and his vote was irrelevent, then why state that he would increase bioterrorist protection? Posted by: Marble at June 3, 2004 12:37 PMBill: Kerry didn't vote against it, he just didn't bother to show up. Posted by: Michael Williams at June 3, 2004 03:35 PMThe fact Kerry didn't bother to show for the vote disallows him the right of being critical of Bush on the subject. Its interesting to note what Kerry thought was more important the day of the vote. He met with Nader the same day, a meeting that took place in Washington. With sirens blaring and lights flashing he could have easily made the vote and kept his meaningless Nader meeting on his agenda. Posted by: Marc at June 3, 2004 08:08 PMThe terrorists' objectives are to create terror. How we mop up afterward is probably of little concern to them. A well-placed innoculation of aircraft passengers who will fan out to numerous cities and towns around the country could have a significant impact on our sense of security. They could perpetrate a series of attacks with different agents, as well. In trying to Posted by: SemiPundit at June 4, 2004 11:41 AMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
