WI DEBATE: The longest answer to a yes or no question

[SangamonTaylor]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44506-2004Feb15_3.html">From the Wisconsin debate, February 15th, 2004

GILBERT: Let me turn to you, Senator Kerry, because you said your vote wasn't a vote for what the president ultimately did. But you did vote to give him the authority, so do you feel any degree, any degree of responsibility for the war and its costs and casualties?

KERRY: This is one of the reasons why I am so intent on beating George Bush and why I believe I will beat George Bush, because one of the lessons that I learned -- when I was an instrument of American foreign policy, I was that cutting-edge instrument. I carried that M- 16.

I know what it's like to try to choose between friend and foe in a foreign country when you're carrying out the policy of your nation.

KERRY: And I know what it's like when you lose the consent and the legitimacy of that war. And that is why I said specifically on the floor of the Senate that what I was voting for was the process the president promised.

There was a right way to do this and there was a wrong way to do it. And the president chose the wrong way because he turned his back on his own pledge to build a legitimate international coalition, to exhaust the remedies of the United Nations in the inspections and to go to war as a matter of last resort.

Last resort means something to me. Obviously, it doesn't mean something to this president. I think it means something to the American people.

And the great burden of the commander in chief is to be able to look into the eyes of any parent or loved one and say to them, "I did everything in my power to prevent the loss of your son and daughter, but we had to do what we had to do because of the imminency of the threat and the nature of our security. "

I don't think the president passes that test.

GILBERT: But what about you? I mean, let me repeat the question. Do you have any degree of responsibility having voted to give him the authority to go to war?


KERRY: The president had the authority to do what he was going to do without the vote of the United States Congress. President Clinton went to Kosovo without the Congress. President Clinton went to Haiti without the Congress.

That's why we have a War Powers Act. What we did was vote with one voice of the United States Congress for a process. And remember, until the Congress asserted itself, this president wasn't intending to go to the United Nations. In fact, it was Jim Baker and Brent Scowcroft and others and the Congress who got him to agree to a specific process. The process was to build a legitimate international coalition, go through the inspections process and go to war as a last resort.

He didn't do it. My regret is not the vote. It was appropriate to stand up to Saddam Hussein. There was a right way to do it, a wrong way to do it.

My regret is this president chose the wrong way, rushed to war, is now spending billions of American taxpayers' dollars that we didn't need to spend this way had he built a legitimate coalition, and has put our troops at greater risk.

GILBERT: You cast the same vote, Senator Edwards, is that the way you see it?

EDWARDS: That's the longest answer I ever heard to a yes or no question. The answer to your question is of course.

We all accept responsibility for what we did. I did what I believed was right. I took it very, very seriously.

I also said at the same time that it was critical when we got to this stage that America not be doing this alone. The president is doing it alone. And the result is what we see happening to our young men and women right now. We need to take a dramatic course. We will take a dramatic course.

And by the way, Senator Kerry just said he will beat George Bush not so fast, John Kerry.

EDWARDS: We're going to have an election here in Wisconsin this Tuesday. And we've got a whole group of primaries coming up. And I, for one, intend to fight with everything I've got for every one of those votes.

And back to your question. What we will do, when I'm president of the United States, is we will change this course. We will bring in the rest of the world we will internationalize this effort. We will bring NATO in to provide security.

For example, we could put NATO today in charge of the Saudi Arabian border, the Iranian border, allow us to concentrate on the Sunni Triangle, where so much of the violence has been occurring.

We do need to change course. And ultimately, we have to get on a real timetable for the Iraqis to govern themselves and provide for their own security.

[boxster]

1. I like Edwards, but I thought his "longest answer" was kind of petty.

Ditto on the "wait a minute, this is still a race" comment Edwards made. He immediately followed up with "When I'm president...", which is no less presumptuous than Kerry's "When I beat Bush..." comment.

In fact, neither is presumptuous, as all candidates say those things. There were plenty of other things for Edwards to focus on outside of the length of answers and Kerry having the audacity to want to beat Bush in November.

[spooky3]

14. Edwards' major point was that despite the many words, Kerry never

took responsibility for his vote nor did he expressly say, "No, I don't accept any responsibility." Edwards then took responsibility for his action. I see this as substantive rather than petty.

[boxster]

17. Ok, I'll agree to that.

I give credit to Edwards for acknowledging responsibility, though I'm not 100% sure that he should.

It all comes back to the question of whether or not they were given enough information to make an educated decision on the IWR. If they were, then yes, they should take responsibility. If they were not and were lied to by Bush, then I think they should say so, which is basically what Kerry did.

[spooky3]

23. I agree with you but if that is Kerry's position, he needs to

develop a more direct way of saying it, I think.

[AP]

2. People complain about E's mill worker dad, but K's M-16 is

something Kerry really likes people's attention to turn to when he's going into mantra-land with his answers.

"Don't listen to the words...just think of me walking through Vietnemese jungles with an M16 in my hand."

I'll take the mills over the M16 any day.

[boxster]

4. I think that both Kerry and Edwards need to be careful with their pet

phrases. Edwards beat the mill to death last night, and I agree with you on the Kerry M-16 thing.

Though, to be fair, Edwards has to overcome the fact that he was a trial lawyer, so making the comparison is necessary. He just needs to be a little more selective with it. :)

[AP]

7. I think they need to hit home what they're running on until

everyone knows what they stand for.

If Edwards stands for making a better life for people who work in the mills, and Kerry stands for Democrats with M-16s, I'll go with Edwards, because that's home-field advantage for Democrats. Democrats win on middle class opportunity, and Republicans win on M-16s.

[boxster]

21. The problem is that often it sounds like it's planted in the answer.

They both have that problem. Edwards usually handles it pretty well, but last night, he snuck it in a couple of times where it didn't really work well. It sounded like he threw it in.

I'd respectfully disagree with your assertion re: M-16s and the middle class. Usually, that is indeed the case. This election, however, the former is going to get a lot more attention by the RW and the media than the latter.

Is that right? Of course not, this election should be about jobs, taxes, poverty, and other domestic issues. Will it be? Nope. Bush has $200 million worth of "national security" ads on the way, so Kerry's M-16 might be a little more important than you give it credit for.

[AP]

28. It's only a problem if you're a campaign-nerd.

To the average listener, it's a useful tool to help you get a tag line which summarizes the entire messge the candidate is running on.

I'll take the mill over the gun because that's home field advanatage for the Democratic Party.

[boxster]

32. I'll agree to that.

True. We know all the nuances and catch phrases of the candidates, so what may seem obvious to us may resonate with a first-time voter. Good point.

I'd take the mill over the gun myself. My point was primarily that the gun is important in this election, whether we like it or not.

[AP]

34. If you're Karl Rove, what do you want Americans to think

primarily about this fall? Mills or guns? They've spent the last three years trying to get Americans to think only about the guns.

I know they have a plan for mills too -- they're going to sink the dollar, which will increase American manufacturing jobs in order to get the white male blue collar vote.

Regardless, I'd rather be running John Edwards. He'll shift the focus off the gun, and he has something to say to blue collar white men that Kerry can't say.

[boxster]

35. That's my point.

They've switched the focus to national security and the war on terror, because they have nothing else to run on.

If they continue to be effective in keeping the focus on those issues, we need to be prepared to counter that argument. The question is whether or not Edwards can do that.

Shifting the focus away from those issues is only effective if it actually works. Bush has $200 million and much of the media to tell people otherwise.

[KittyWampus]

5. Kerry's M16 Is An Historical Fact

which MANY Americans either relate to through personal experience or respect.

Edwards nonsense about his father is pure fantasy with the intent of fostering an image not grounded in reality.

[AP]

8. Kerry's M16 is an attempt to patch a weakness for democrats --

the perception that they're soft on national security.

Edwards carring about people who work for a living is the fact of his entire life, from birth, to career, to politics.

Carring about how people who have nothing buy their own labor to give to society in order to gain comfort, wealth and opportunity, is EXACTLY the core of the Democratic party.

I'd rather run on the mill than the M-16 if I were a Democrat who actually wanted to win.

[maxanne]

3. good for Edwards

Kerry's long winded non-answer is an embarassment to us all.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AP]

9. You have a cite for that?

[philgoblue]

22. On Saddam

Tell that to the Kuwaitis? Do you think that Saddam was following the UN? Did it make sense at the time of the vote to support the President as he promised to work through the UN and gain a real international coalition to force Saddam to allow genuine inspectors? It's great and fun to be anti-war. But there ARE real threats to America.

[PurityOfEssence]

33. Trifecta! Factual, grammatical AND spelling errors!

Piffle, you say? Petty, perhaps? Sure, but remember: sloppiness of presentation often betrays sloppy thinking.

This man is a veritable hero for the people; his voting record, life story and personality should be things around which people rally.

[paulk]

36. speak for yourself /nt

[ModerateMiddle]

10. someone pointed out

that Edwards' response to the "wordiest answer" was 268 words, to Kerry's 198.

[AP]

12. Except Edwards was saying something. Kerry was avoiding

saying something.

[dionysus]

13. that's BS

Edwards answered the question in his second sentence.

[disenfranchised]

11. Kerry was given twice as much time in the debate as any other candidate.

I don't blame Edwards for pointing out how long his answer took.

I thought debates were supposed to be about giving each person equal time...how ignorant of me.

[spooky3]

15. yes it seemed that way to me too, but does anyone have a time count?

sometimes this is posted on the web.

[revcarol]

20. All I know is that Kerry got 18 answwers, my candidate got EIGHT.

Not even HALF the opportunities to answer.

[spooky3]

27. sounds like a pretty clear disparity

[disenfranchised]

29. Here you go.

From the Hotline
--Milwaukee 2/15--

Dean 10 min 37 sec
Edwards 9 min 52 sec
Kerry 19 min 25 sec
Kucinich 5 min 47 sec
Sharpton 9 min 49 sec

[spooky3]

30. Thanks, disenfranchised! Much as I hate the alarm

bells, they do need to have a better system of ensuring equal time. Maybe they need to

--have someone keep track of the time during the first hour
--have a long enough commercial break to share the tally with the panel
--for the final half hour, adjust questions, and who is going to be asked them, to get closer to equal time

[AP]

31. It wasn't the bells. I think they asked Kerry 5 Qs before

they asked Edwards his second question.

[HuskerDem]

16. That was a weak and petty remark by Edwards

It's a shame to see his glossy coating slip a little.

I'm sure if we looked through the debates we could find a question Mr.Edwards could have answered with yes or no that was just as long.

I notice also Mr. Edwards did not choose to answer the same question with a simple yes or no, which is some kind of record turnaround time for hypocrisy.

Snarkiness is unbecoming of him.

[AP]

19. It helped the audience put their finger on exactly what they

must have been sensing -- that Kerry was sidestepping the question.

Did I tell you that I once carried an M-16 in the Vietnemese jungles?

And Edwards answered the question in two words: 'of course."

[Sensitivity]

18. That's My Problem w/ Edwards. He was really pro-war.

[revcarol]

24. He is STILL pro-war.

The war never ended, our troops are still being killed. If you are FOR the occupation, you're still FOR WAR>

[spooky3]

26. he voted against the $87 billion and has made specific

suggestions on what * should be doing (both at the time of IWR and now), which Bush has not done.

[philgoblue]

25. Edwards on War

Personally, I'm not sure what JRE would say.
But, what was your solution in the winter of 2002-2003?
Would you have supported massing troops on Iraq's borders to enforce inspections one last time if the UN and NATO had supported us? I real President could have easily used diplomacy to create a massive international coalition. If he'd have had that, what would you have thought about using war to put an end to Saddam and the threat that not just Bush (who way over-exaggerated), but Clinton believed was real?