# Kerry Credibility Problem? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 12, 2004, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908 "2004-03-12T15:44:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/21 "2004-03-14T04:43:49Z")
> [@](#): > > Our elected officials maintain detailed travel records which if you bothered to read the linked article in the OP you would see that Kerry’s records do not account for any recent meetings with foreign leaders but yet he makes a public statement to the contrary. My guess is that you are referring to this part: > [@](#): > > According to travel records kept by the Secretary of the Senate, Mr. Kerry’s last official trip abroad was in early 2002 when he visited the United Kingdom, Jordan, Egypt and Israel. The only other trip noted in Senate records since that time is an October 2002 domestic trip to Charleston, S.C., to appear on MSNBC’s Hardball program. The implication here is that if the Senate does not have records of the trip, it did not occur. This is 100% bull. Think about this for 5 seconds: do you really believe that the only trips Kerry has made in the past two years have been to Charleston, SC, and a couple of foreign countries?? You’ve got to be mentally ill to believe this, seeing as how he has WON THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION BY TOURING AROUND THE UNITED STATES. The Senate, and the State Department, keep records of official travel - as in when one travels for work, not for pleasure or for politics. The mention that there have only been 30 **official** visits to the US by foreign leads since last year seems equally bogus - to use just one example, every time a Taiwanese official visits the US, it is not official, because we do not have “official” relations with Taiwan. I am willing to bet my life savings that there have been more than 30 visits, in official and unofficial capacities, of 180-plus heads of state to the US in the last two years. It’s a no-brainer. Kerry’s statement was stupid because it is obvious that he would not name names to prove his allegation. But that doesn’t mean that the Washington Times and its axe-grinding, political hack reporters have proved Kerry wrong. ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/22 "2004-03-14T05:03:01Z")
> [@](#): > > According to travel records kept by the Secretary of the Senate, Mr. Kerry’s last official trip **abroad** was in early 2002 > [@](#): > > You’ve got to be mentally ill to believe this, seeing as how he has WON THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION BY TOURING AROUND THE UNITED STATES. **Ravenman** , traveling abroad normally refers to outside of the country. I really don’t think he has MET with any foreign leaders while making his campaign stops. As for all of your “I’ll bet you visits”, feel free to provide some documentation of when Kerry was with a foreign leader. ---
**Author:** ![far\_born](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5e9695/32.png) [@far\_born](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/far_born)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/23 "2004-03-14T05:14:51Z")
> [@SimonX](#): > > Before I begin let it be known that I am a conservative, (or Liberal in the classical sense as per Milton Friedman), a registered Republican, a donor to my local GOP, and a GOP Team Leader. Oy vey! Say it ain’t so, Joe! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/24 "2004-03-14T05:46:14Z")
Hell, I think friend **Flickster’s** on to something. Or maybe he’s just on something, but still… Let’s make “credibility” the whole focus of the election! We have this deeply suspicious and probably disloyal statement from Sen. Kerry, which may, upon examination, prove to be an exaggeration, an embellishment, if not an out and out lie! On the other hand, we have that paragon of candor, GeeDubya. So, I guess, unless we can come up with some untruth that has passed his lips, we’ll just have to concede the election on the grounds of credibility. Boy, this is going to be a tough one… ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/25 "2004-03-14T06:40:33Z")
**Luc** , please refer to my question in the OP > [@](#): > > Does Kerry have a more pronounced problem with credibility than your average politician? I didn’t think it was really that hard of a question, but after numerous frothing responses not a single Doper has yet to address it. You have been far too busy either trying to discredit the source (without any documentation I might add), sidestep the issue altogether or just divert the attention to Bush. IMHO, I didn’t go out of my way to hang a golden star on either one. I’m not naive enough to think that either candidate is incapable of bending the truth. Some just have a greater propensity than others. ---
**Author:** ![Pashnish\_Ewing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@Pashnish\_Ewing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pashnish_Ewing)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/26 "2004-03-14T19:52:47Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > Now there are only two options - > either > #1 - he was telling an outright lie hoping the media would just run with it without question like they usually do. > or > #2 - he misspoke and should have said I have talked to foreign leaders instead of met with foreign leaders. or #3 - Like most everyone in the business world, Kerry considers tele-conferences, on-line meetings, and web-conferences _actual meetings_, and the “in person” qualifier unnecessary. > [@flickster](#): > > Does Kerry have a more pronounced problem with credibility than your average politician? As it relates to this issue, no. Pash ---
**Author:** ![annaplurabelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@annaplurabelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/annaplurabelle)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/27 "2004-03-14T20:29:20Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > **Luc** , please refer to my question in the OP > > > [@](#): > > > > Does Kerry have a more pronounced problem with credibility than your average politician? > > I didn’t think it was really that hard of a question, but after numerous frothing responses not a single Doper has yet to address it. You have been far too busy either trying to discredit the source (without any documentation I might add), sidestep the issue altogether or just divert the attention to Bush. This is completely disingenuous. Your question was addressed. First, if you’re so concerned with credibility, why would you not be concerned with the credibility of your source? You claimed this: > [@flickster](#): > > Personally, I don’t have enough exposure to the Washington Times to have an opinion of the publication in general. And then you go on to say: > [@](#): > > Interesting sources, none of which carry any more credibility than the Washington Times. Funny how you were able to make that judgement, w/o “enough exposure” to the WT. :rolleyes: Want "documentation? Here: > **[Full text of Saudi King's speech delivered remotely to 76th UN General...](https://www.mediamonitors.net/full-text-of-saudi-kings-speech-delivered-remotely-to-76th-un-general-assembly/)** > > Riyadh (UNA-OIC) – Custodian of Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud confirmed the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s perpetual commitment with the international legitimacy principles and resolutions, respect of national sovereignty of all... [http://www.fair.org/media-outlets/washington-times.html](http://www.fair.org/media-outlets/washington-times.html) [http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20011119.html](http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20011119.html) > **[The Washington Times](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Times)** > > The Washington Times is an American conservative daily newspaper published in Washington, D.C., that covers general interest topics with a particular emphasis on national politics. Its broadsheet daily edition is distributed throughout the District of Columbia and in parts of Maryland and Virginia. A weekly tabloid edition aimed at a national audience is also published. > The Washington Times was founded on May 17, 1982, by Unification movement leader Sun Myung Moon and owned until 2010 by News... [http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/031001a.html](http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/031001a.html) Second, you ignored **Ravenman** ’s point about official v. _un_official visits (whether here or abroad), and cherry picked a portion of the cite as a retort. You ignored my cite about Kerry’s well connected family abroad, diplomatic background, etc. You ignored the explanation that “foreign leaders” don’t necessarily mean presidents/prime ministers. You ignored _your own cite_’s assertion that “it could well be true”. Third, your question was _comparative_ (ie “…more than your average politician?”), yet you disdain the comparisons to the Bush admin. Frankly, _your_ credibility as an “innocent” (as per Milum), asking a “simple question” sinks lower with each of your replies. If you believe Kerry lacks credibility, it’s _your_ case to prove. ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/28 "2004-03-14T20:36:18Z")
> [@](#): > > #3 - Like most everyone in the business world, Kerry considers tele-conferences, on-line meetings, and web-conferences actual meetings, and the “in person” qualifier unnecessary. **Pash** , if it’s that simple of an explanation then why don’t they just say so. The obvious reason is that it would just be another fib/lie/misstatement (call it what you will). Is this going to be an issue the main stream media will investigate? No, the reason being they don’t want to get kicked off the campaign bus. That’s why candidates from either party can, for the most part, say what they want and promise things they can’t possibly deliver all in the name of garnering votes. There isn’t an (and hasn’t been any for years) attempt to hold anyone accountable or to investigate claims made while on the campaign trail. Sad to say that most everything heard by the general public is accepted as being factual (as long as it supports your candidate of choice). ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/29 "2004-03-14T22:35:13Z")
> [@flickster](#): > > **Pash** , if it’s that simple of an explanation then why don’t they just say so. Perhaps they weren’t asked? Did the known-partisan WT even try to get Kerry to explain anything that puzzled them before publishing this solemn condemnation of his credibility? Did you even think about any other possibilities before swallowing it whole? This is going to be a long campaign. Go out at too quick a pace and you’ll be burned out long before the finish line. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2004, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/30 "2004-03-14T23:25:42Z")
Holy shit! I can’t believe that there is a whole entire thread on this. This is even better than all the hay made of the (exaggerated) stories of Gore’s “lies” about inventing the internet and such! I mean, here we have a President who freakin’ lies and distorts every day. (See, for example, here and here. The latter may have distortions and other things that are not true lies but you have to consider that they publish a new one 5 days a week, plus special in depth analyses.) And, you Bush supporters are worrying about whether Kerry might have characterized something like a teleconference as having met with a leader or whether he might have included people who were not heads of state, e.g., ambassadors, as leaders? I mean, if you really want to get picky, I’ll give you one of my little pet peeves which is when Bush [said](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/06/03/tech/main510920.shtml), “I read the report put out by the bureaucracy” in regards to an EPA report on global warming when it turns out that he hadn’t actually read it but had just been briefed on it. So, here he not only lied but he was incredibly disrespectful of people working under his command. (If I ran a company and a manager said something like that in regards to something prepared by people working under him, I’d fire his ass!) And, as near as I can tell, this one hasn’t even registered on the radar screen…It is not even that high on my list of Bush lies and it doesn’t seem to be on anyone else’s list. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2004, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/31 "2004-03-15T00:25:41Z")
[Kerry Won’t Say Which Foreign Leaders Support Him](http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=3&u=/nm/20040314/pl_nm/campaign_kerry_dc) > [@](#): > > “No leader would obviously share a conversation if I started listing them,” Kerry told reporters after Secretary of State Colin Powell suggested he name some names or stop implying foreign leaders were encouraging him to beat Bush. Kerry’s position makes a lot of sense, especially when you consider it in light of the white house’s retaliatory outing of CIA operative Valery Plame. ---
**Author:** ![Atticus\_Finch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ec9cab/32.png) [@Atticus\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atticus_Finch)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2004, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/32 "2004-03-15T00:57:47Z")
Ah, come on, this whole thread’s just the Republican [meme of the week](http://www.rnc.org/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=3983). I’m no particular Kerry fan, but this is just mud. ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2004, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/33 "2004-03-15T06:00:31Z")
Ooh, serry is on the Axis of Evil. oooh. ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2004, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/34 "2004-03-15T06:02:01Z")
> [@capacitor](#): > > Ooh, serry is on the Axis of Evil. oooh. That’s Kerry! ---
**Author:** ![Airblairxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Airblairxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airblairxxx)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2004, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/35 "2004-03-15T19:07:23Z")
> [@Milum](#): > > So then why, in the interest of credibility, don’t the people who speak for Mister Kerry, simply say that he misspoke? Because most of us Kerryites were previously Goremen (and -women) and remember all too well when Al Gore got hammered for misspeaking about his role in the commercialization of [the Internet](http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.htm). Just like Gore, this claim was made in an off-the-cuff (but on-the-record)discussion with reporters. Just like Gore, this “controversy” hinges on the parsing of every word uttered by the candidate; substitute one essentially synonymous phrase (‘spoke to’) for another (‘met with’) and the issue evaporates like a fart on a windy day. And we don’t see a point in trying to explain uninformed, out-of-context, or unverifiable claims made against our candidate, when the whole point of said claims is to corrosively attach them to the public’s perception of our candidate, like a limpet mine. In other words, it doesn’t matter whether it’s true or not, whether Mr Kerry misspoke or not; it only matters whether this charge sticks to Kerry. A meme, if you will (thanks, **lambchops** ). So if you ask why we don’t loudly claim he misspoke–even though I suggested earlier that maybe he just talked to the foreign leaders on the phone–it’s because we greet this accusation with the same precisely calibrated amount of partisan bullshit from whence it sprung. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2004, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/36 "2004-03-15T20:35:15Z")
True enough, but the damage is done. Now tame pundits can off-handedly refer to Kerry’s “credibility problem” as though such a thing actually existed, without the inconvenience of proving anything. Just like Gore’s “internet invention”, it doesn’t need a basis in fact to “resonate”. OK, that’s the bad news. The good news is that the Bushiviks would have found some basis to insinuate a credibility problem anyway, its impossible to prevent such an attack. And such insinuations only work on people inclined to think the worst of Kerry _anyway_. Preaching to the choir, so to speak. So its annoying, but more or less a wash. The Bushiviks are scrambling, they have to improvise, and thats dangerous. They thought they had this one bagged, a slam dunk, running against Dean, a lot of 9/11, a little Gay Marriage, and badda-boom badda bing, an unshakeable mandate for the Shining One. They only flung out this “credibility” thing 'cause they didn’t have anything else but Jane Fonda, and only us forgotten fogies even remember what “Hanoi Jane” means! Worse still, our bent brethren and sistren scored a coup. By depicting gays and lesbians are pretty ordinary, boring folks who want to buy wedding cakes and register patterns at Bloomies, they undermined the menace. America looks and says “Gee, these folks look pretty normal, you didn’t tell me they were pervo, I wouldn’t know. What’s everybody so worried about? OK, we want to keep the term “marriage” just for us, but surely some sort of adjustment can be made, seems only fair…” If gays arent threatening, the issue loses its menace, and only works for the already committed. (To the aforementioned bent brethren and sistren: you’ve made your point, if you’re done now, could you get over here and help us save the rest of us? It’s kinda important…) ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2004, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/37 "2004-03-15T21:24:05Z")
Right. [But their campaign will be against Gore, not Dukakis](http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2004/03/13/bush_campaign_seeks_to_liken_kerry_gore/) > [@](#): > > Senator John F. Kerry has been steeling himself for Republican charges that he is a “Massachusetts liberal,” but senior Bush strategists say they won’t treat the presumptive Democratic nominee like another Michael S. Dukakis. Instead, they plan to paint him as Al Gore – a waffling Washington insider too aloof to connect with average Americans. > … > But Grover Norquist, head of the conservative Americans for Tax Reform and a close White House ally, insisted that comparisons with Gore are far more salient than the Dukakis approach – cutting to the core of Kerry’s character rather than criticizing his beliefs. > > "If you say, `Gore's a liberal,' moderates and undecideds say, `I know that,’ " Norquist said. “But if you then say `Gore fibs,' or `Kerry will say anything to get elected, marry anybody to get elected, he’s the overambitious kid you hated in high school and was class president,’ that has an effect.” > > Norquist added, “If Kerry will say anything, do anything, flip-flop, then when he gets in a corner down the road and changes his position, you’ll say he doesn’t mean it. He can’t say anything to endear him to you if you’ve been convinced he’ll say anything.” At least I have the good fortune to live in a noncompetitive state. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2004, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/38 "2004-03-16T02:07:10Z")
The administration today demanded that Kerry name these ‘foreign leaders’. He has refused. This story has legs. Today, [Colin Powell](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58666-2004Mar14.html) stepped up to the plate: > [@](#): > > “I don’t know what foreign leaders Senator Kerry is talking about,” Powell said on “Fox News Sunday.” “It’s an easy charge, an easy assertion to make. But if he feels it is that important an assertion to make, he ought to list some names. If he can’t list names, then perhaps he should find something else to talk about.” I can’t believe you guys are going to toe the partisan line that this isn’t an issue. Because I know damned well that if Bush came out and said, “I’ve met with foreign leaders who tell me that they hope I am re-elected because they have grave doubts about John Kerry,” you guys would be the first to demand that he name names. And if he came back and said, “I’m not going to tell you”, you’d roast him for it. It’s a sleazy tactic. By claiming you have the support of unnamed ‘foreign leaders’ and refusing to name them, you make it impossible for the other side to rebut. In other Kerry non-credibility news, Colin Powell also [ripped him a new one](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,114159,00.html) over his suggestion that the Bush Administration could have settled the Libya issue earlier, but didn’t for political reasons: > [@](#): > > WALLACE: Senator Kerry has also suggested that the Bush administration held up the agreement with Libya for it to give up its nuclear weapons program to help in the president’s reelection. > > This is what Senator Kerry had to say, and you can see it on the screen: “Gadhafi’s been trying to get back into the mainstream for several years now. There’s evidence that we could’ve had that deal some time ago.” > > POWELL: It’s absurd. I don’t know what Senator Kerry’s talking about. It’s just absurd. That took time to bring that deal together. And I’ve been following it very, very closely for a number of months. And when finally the United States and the United Kingdom negotiators got a deal with Libya, we acted on that deal and we announced that deal. It was not held up for any campaign or political purpose. > > WALLACE: You seem offended by it. > > POWELL: Well, it is offensive because it’s a political charge in a political year. And I expect that we will be hearing and seeing many more charges and many more such video clips. But I don’t know what basis Senator Kerry is using to make such a statement. I mean, what is his evidence for this, other than an assertion on his part? It’s not accurate. If Kerry keeps saying things like this, and then refusing to back up his assertions with evidence, he’s going to be labelled a dissembler and a liar, and he’ll damned well deserve it. He wouldn’t get away with that crap on the SDMB without a cite, and I fail to see why he should get away with it in a presidental election. ---
**Author:** ![dave316](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/76d3ee/32.png) [@dave316](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dave316)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2004, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/39 "2004-03-16T02:42:13Z")
its obvious who the leaders are France and Germany i think most people figured it out long ago i know i did ---
**Author:** ![cheddarsnax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cheddarsnax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cheddarsnax)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2004, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908/40 "2004-03-16T02:42:30Z")
[Drudge Reports.](http://drudgereport.com/kerrybo.htm) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kerry-credibility-problem/233908.md?page=3)