|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1922
|
Well, DanR, I think you are paranoid - plain and simple. NOT because you are wrong, but simply because we don''t count. Nobody will come looking for us because we are irrelevant. I have an audience of 6 and most of them don''t agree with me most of the time. Skull and Bones has nothing to fear from the likes of me. Or you. Hell, they aren''t even concerned that 50% of the population doesn''t support them. My guess? They think they are invulnerable. My thought: they are. Marie Antoinette said, "Let them eat cake!" GWB says, "Let them watch TV on bigger screens. Fill it up with sitcomes and sports. Approve cheaper Prozac and Viagra and keep those damn shiny cars a-coming. The people are sheep. We have no fears from them. In fact, put ''em in uniform and send the young ones overseas every now and then just to keep the lid on in this country. Wahoo. Now, on to world domination.......wasn''t that NAFTA thing brilliant?"
"Geez, JD, are you a Democrat? Are you a lefty? ABSOLUTELT NOT!!! Those doofus''s think the system CAN work and all it needs is a change of cast. The system is corrupt. Plain and simple. Kerry is a member of Skull and Bones and, even if he wasn''t, he is part of the ''establishment''. THEY RULE.
Ironically, any of us can get in to the establishment. Entry fee: You only have to be rich and pledge your complete submission to the system. Don''t argue. Don''t tell the truth. Just ''buy in'' and play the game. It is very egalitarian in that sense. Open to the common man/woman. It''s just that you cannot have a brain or any morals. Check your cerebral cortex at the door.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 4491
|
Remember these old sayings:
"It is not what you know, but WHO you know"
& my all time fav:
"Money talks and Bulls**t Walks"
(that one''s from my bartending days!![;)])
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1922
|
Uhhhhhhhh, Ajor, I must be missing something.......what the Hell has that got to do with anything just posted?
One thing I am surprised at (it''s getting to be a familiar feeling).......nobody but DanR responded to the ''USE YOUR HEAD''! admonition?
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 4491
|
quote:
Originally posted by jdcox
Uhhhhhhhh, Ajor, I must be missing something.......what the Hell has that got to do with anything just posted?
One thing I am surprised at (it''s getting to be a familiar feeling).......nobody but DanR responded to the ''USE YOUR HEAD''! admonition?
[:o)]
JD, I am responding to the whole ''conspiracy'' stuff that was just mentioned ie: Clintons conspiring to keep out dems for their own 2008 run; murders by Clinton supporters while they were in white house; Bush fam owned/funded by Saudi gov.
Sorry not to have been clearer!!
Then I just threw in my own "other" favorite saying too. What the heck![:D]
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1922
|
Oh. But what about the observation (or opinion) that the whole thing is rigged and Kerry or Bush is irrelevant?
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 4491
|
quote:
Originally posted by jdcox
Oh. But what about the observation (or opinion) that the whole thing is rigged and Kerry or Bush is irrelevant?
[:X][:X][:X]
Oh you mean "your" observation?? Ok, if nobody knows that by now, then why crush them?? If they think that Clinton was "just a Good Ole Boy" from a little Arkansas town instead of an OXFORD GRADUATE/Rhodes Scholar "Old Boy Network Connected" good ole boy, then what on earth could I say to change that???????????? Except as written above....Money talks, b/s walks! Ooops I mean...."Its not What you know BUT WHO you know!"[:0][:0][:0]
Now since you bought it up....what about your obs. on my comment about John Edwards consistently reminding me of Damien from The Omen?
LOL, you don''t really have to answer!![:D][:D]
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1922
|
Thanks.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
Remind me again how Democrats are tax and spend??? Reagan seems to be the only one to do what R''s claim. And he did it with a Dem controlled congress.
"Since taking office in 2001, Bush has allowed domestic discretionary outlays to soar by an annual average of 8.2 percent. That compared with 2.5 percent a year under Bill Clinton, 4.0 percent of George Bush the Elder, 2.0 percent of Jimmy Carter, and 6.8 percent under Richard Nixon. Under Ronald Reagan, nondefense discretionary spending declined by 1.3 percent per year. (All percentages are inflation-adjusted.) By any measure, Bush the Younger is the biggest-spending president in memory."
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/02/05/the_most_bloated_budget_ever/
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
I would think that a major portion of the overspending has been with the several national disasters that have happened, the assistance given to New york city after 9/11, plus the creation of several different government agencies dealing with security would have something to do with a major chunk of the overspending.
even if you replace bush today with a democrat, they wouldn''t change the spending habits but would cut our military budget. The last one that cut our military budget had our soldiers living on foodstamps!
Some thanks for men and women who will serve our country.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
So what do you think about the recent cuts to the VA and the cuts to combat pay?
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 926
|
Apemanevo please give us a url or something we can go on. I am not a vet or in the miltary so i am not sure what you are refering to.
I feel Bush is doing a good job. I beleave he does the best he can to reduce taxes.I beleave he done what he felt was right in regards to the war.I beleave he does all he can when there is a national disaster. I say give him a pat on the back.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
The war was planned prior to the election, 9/11 (the national disaster) had nothing to do with it. It is in the Republican Platform from 2000 courtesy of the Project for a New American Century.
As for the cuts in Veterans Affairs in the Bush Admin''s budget, any source will be dismissed by most here as "liberal" and therefor irrelevant, but a good summary can be found here:
http://www.usavanguard.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/01/28/401970abb42d7?template=pda
more here:
http://themeridiannews.com/bushveterans.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0328-11.htm
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
First of all apemanevo, The VA is one of the most inefficiently run organizations that has ever existed. It could do with some cuts that would force them to revamp the whole organization and make them streamline. But i haven''t seen this budget that everyone talks about.
Secondly, if he did submit it to the congress, then why is it that the democrats in congress pitch a bitch! they manage to about everything else. Also not all republican congressmen would necessarily go for that either and that would give a majority to overide that portion of cuts.
Third, i don''t see budget cuts on the servicemen now. At least they don''t have to get foodstamps now to live, and they all have had raises.
But lets not forget, it was Clintons administration that had cut the military down close all the bases around the country, dislocated 50,000 workers in millington tn base for one example, as well as required the family of a deceased soldier even when killed in action, to pay for taps to be played at his funeral which was done from a CD player. Yes they stopped a real live soldier from playing taps.
Clintons administration also cut the VA benefits far more than what Bush has cut over his 8 years in office, and just about eliminated most of the veterans retirement benefits as well as the education benefits. If they didn''t use them within 10 years they lose them.
Last of all, of all the veterans in my family, none have had their benefits slashed. I just asked them and they said they have their benfits and don''t know what all this is about.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 530
|
just a link ,get the scoop on em, voteing records ,who supports , rating''s by group''s/lobbist''s etc.
http://www.vote-smart.org/
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
Also to get back on track with the thread topic, it seems that kerry is just starting to battle his past. Especially with his treasonous association with hanoi jane!
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
If the press starts asking questions about this stuff, the President is in deep...534 known US dead. Are you still convinced it was all about 9/11?
"Within a month of Bush''s swearing-in as the 41st President, documents had been prepared by Rumsfeld''s group in the Defense Intelligence Agency that mapped Iraq''s oil fields and exploration areas and listed companies that might be interested in Iraqi assets. One document, headed "Foreign suitors for Iraqi oilfield contracts," listed companies from 30 countries including France, Germany, Russia, and the United Kingdom. It was very detailed on who would get what, O''Neill recalled."
http://baltimorechronicle.com/feb04_PriceofLoyalty.html
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 3005
|
Bush has just released his pay documents from his time in the reserves. This should put to rest any questions about his service, except for those who are ABB. For them, I suggest they move to China, then they will get their wish.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
Those records showed he didn''t get paid from april 1972 to oct 1972...that would be 6 months away, by my count.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 279
|
The election will be close. There is little doubt Kerry can win. Naturally, Bush & his Chickenhawk Brigade, who never spent a day in active duty, will attempt to paint the war hero Kerry as Unamerican.
If Kerry is enough of a sap to let a Chickenhawk like Bush smear him, he deserves to lose.
The American people are still pretty gullible. 60% of them believe Saddam was responsible for 9/11. With $200 million in the Bush campaign coffers, the dirty tricks crew over at Republican Central are salivating in anticipation.
The country remains split.
Proud member of the ABB brigade.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
Kerry was a TRAITOR Hoop, he was a communist sympathizer and associated himself with the commie jane fonda! He also disrespected all military veterans with his lack of respect for the medals he was given.
I will tell ya even though president bush has not handled spending well, I would rather put him back in office than put a traitor in office.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1728
|
You can say that CLINTON was a traitor for for doing everything he could to avoid the draft. You can say George W Bush was a traitor for doing everything he could to avoid combat, but JOHN KERRY was THERE. He saw what was going on and in the end felt that he was awraded medals for doing something wrong. In Vietnam after 1968 we were doing NOTHING but propping up an horrific evil dictator. It got so bad the PEOPLE THESELVES in Vietnam preferred COMMUNISM to the war. THAT IMHO is getting pretty bad. In the end the only folks who wanted out were those who had helpe the U.S. They knew that they were done for.
REMEMBER FOLKS George W BUSH is brought to you by the same people that brought you SAXBY CHAMBLISS and questioned the patriotism of a triple amputee from Vietnam.
SHRUB can''t account for SIX MONTHS of his time in Alabama. IF any of US had been ordered to report to the Guard and been missing for SIX MONTHS would be still be walking around free?
YES, if our father was a congressman and had gotten us into a unit that was not bound for combat anyway.
Remember what he said when he was asked why, if he beleived in the reasons for the U.S. being in Vietnam, he didn''t volunteer to go, he said, "Someone had to stay behind and defend the Alamo. I''m serious about this". YUP that''s SOME PATRIOT!
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 3748
|
Did you hear about the long delays on the golf course outside the capitol at Washington, DC? Seems like there was a foursome playing that was taking forever to get around the course. The group consisted of Monica Lewinski, OJ Simpson, Ted Kennedy, and Bill Clinton. According to observers, the problems they were having were attributable to typical problems faced by the novice golfer. Monica is a hooker, OJ is a slicer, Kennedy cannot drive over water, and Clinton is never sure which hole he is supposed to be playing.
This doesn''t have diddly to do with Kerry''s run for the White House, but the humor is needed in this thread.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 3005
|
Kerry''s negitives are more than he will be able to overcome. Consider the following:
1) He is on the wrong side of the abortion debate. The Catholic Church has told him that he can not receive "communion" because of his stand.
2) He is on the wrong side of the "gun control" debate. He wants to protect the criominals at your expence.
3) He is on the wrong side of the homosexual marrage debate. With oveer 80% of the people saying they do not want homosexual marrage allowed in the U.S., Kerry hedges his statements.
4) Kerry states that he will "roll back" the Bush tax cuts. That the "rich" should pay their fair share. But with the top 10% of income earners paying over 50% of all the income taxes collected and the top 50% paying over 95%, what will be his "fair sahre"? Again, he hedges his statements. As a footnote, all income tax rate reductions since the income tax ws introduced have resulted in vast increases in the amount of money the government takes in. Like all democrates, Kerry has never seen a tax he did not like.
5) Kerry is a gigolo. He has never had to work to support himself and therefore does not even have an idea of what it takes for the average American family to survive. He is completely out of touch with reality.
Remember, it only takes three strikes to get someone out in baseball, Kerry is two strikes over that limit. Looks like Billery will be gitting his/her wish. Another easy win for the Republican party. But this win will make it even harder for them, Billery, to win in 2008.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
hildabeast wants the republicans to win this one, if a dem gets office this time, she can''t run in 2008. ;)
But Andy, come on give the national guard thing a rest, they released the records and it shows he was there!
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1728
|
DanR:
Keep in mind that MANY MANY people are still angry about the election if FLA in 2000. For a good idea of what went wrong there''s a short book by Vincent Bugliosi.
ALSO in 1980 Carter''s folks were hoping to get Reagan as an opponent. The felt that Americans were too smart to vote for a man who claimed that it was "none of our business" who else in the world had Nuclear Weapons. In 1992 Geroge the Elder was THRILLED to have a "an unknownd governor from and insignifigant state between Texas and Oklahoma" as his opponent.
SHRUB will be in a tough fight and he is already starting to do the same things his father did prior to getting his butt whipped by the unknown governor. Just yesterday he said it was a good thing that all these service sector jobs were going to other countries. They need to get him to stop that kind of stuff and dump Cheney or Shrub will, like his father, join the ONE TERM CLUB.
Shrub will need to explain why he did put send sufficent resources to find Bin Laden, why he is allowing POPPY production to go back in place in Afghan. And why he will lose more jobs during his time in office than ANY President since Herbert Hoover.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 144
|
We are in a real tight spot here. Probably what we need to do, although it goes against the grain, is get more boots on the ground as they say and it would be nice if they could be other than US boots. They terrorists in Iraq are succeding in their efforts to demoralize the nation and the civil war is next. It is better to keept the bad guys over there but, if we make more of them that there were because we did not go the job right, then all of our people are dying in vain. Shades of the 60''s. I do not like the pickle we are in but we are there. If we flub this one we have created a Frankenstine''s monster of many more terrorists who will bear a grudge about Iraq. God, what a mess. I don''t think anyone running is really capable of pulling this one out of the fire. On top of it I agree with the Hermit. We are becoming a police state for the sake of safety. One does have to take risks in life. The bad guys are right we are too soft.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 3005
|
Andy:
The only thing wrong in Fla. in 2000 was that the SCFLA put itself into the mix. The law is clear that the legislature sets up the rules for the state to follow. When the results did not go the way the dems wanted, they attempted to change the rules in the middle of the game. The SCUS slapped them down for it. Bush would have carried Ill. if there had been a recount in Cook county, aka Chicago, which tossed out more ballots than the entire state of Fla. That is just amother reason to vote against the dems, they are just a bunch of little cry babies. In addition, they do not like those of us who live in the "fly over country". They only want to allow the people in the northeast, Chicago area and the big cities of the west coast to vote. The rest of us are considered to be "low lifes who don''t know what is good for us", that we should allow the dems nannies to lead us around by the hand so we want get into trouble.
Cheri:
If you live in a state that has a non-discressionary concealed carry law, and you do not have the license, then you are too soft. I for one, having worked as a correctional officer and having seen just how bad the bad guys really are, refuse to be a victum. The more people who obtain these licenses the lower will be the crime rate against people. But again, the dems like sheeple not people who will take care of themselves. I have stated it more than once, "the government that governs best is the government that governs least". Not something the dems like to even hear. Do I agree with the so called patriot act. I worked to defeat it. I was glad to see the sunset provesion added. I am working to defeat patriot 2. If you do not like the police state, join me. Otherwise, well you know.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 144
|
Don''t need a permit in Alaska. I have a small pea shooter that has saved my bacon twice. My dad always told me if you pull it mean to use it. I do live by that one.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1922
|
Our government has just been caught YET AGAIN with staggering corruption and misappropriation of funds. The LIBERAL party in Canada has ruled for the majority of my lifespan and, year after year, the Auditor General finds major violations of fiscal responsibility and common sense - not to mention the comeplete absence of ''fairness'' to taxpayers and arrogant regional favouritism. We are so morally bankrupt, it is a wonder we aren''t actually bankrupt.
But you know what? They''ll get in again.
"What! How can this be?!" Well you might ask. How is it possible for crooks to get re-elected? Well, it is an interesting question with a fiendishly simple answer: the people do not get to pick who runs. It''s that simple. A select group of people pick who runs and, since we have only two viable parties in each region, a very small select group controls the ''nomination'' process. Of course, the media accommodates this travesty wholly. It is cheaper to chase two candidates than ten. Plus they are part of the expense ''trough'' that feeds all this.
So we get to choose between Crook #1 and Crook #2. To be fair, we are offered up not ''crooks'' but ''pretty boys'' and ''strong-jawed'' women. Puppets. Poor, pathetic fodder for the system that tells them to ''shut up and sit down'' right from day one. Even a corrupt fodder-puppet may TRY to do the right thing. But they can''t. Their vote fdoesn''t count and they have no voice either. They are ''mothballed'' unless they sign on to the tacit agreement of corruption. Then they get to say what they are told to say and maybe get a ministry to run. Bigger pension.
So, whether it''s Martha Smith running or George Jones, it makes no difference. They were hand-picked by the party and then ''managed'' by the system.
You are no different.
Can''t you see this?
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 3748
|
quote:
Originally posted by cheri
Don''t need a permit in Alaska. I have a small pea shooter that has saved my bacon twice. My dad always told me if you pull it mean to use it. I do live by that one.
Excellent rule to live by. And it sounds almost like the way I was taught. To that I would add; if you are forced to use it, aim for center mass and double-tap. It is better to be tried by twelve than carried by six.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
Dan what is it that your doing to fight patriot act2?
Just was listening today and John Kerry has made the statement that he would subject the soverignty of the US under the UN in military matters. As it has always been the President has sole control over sending troops overseas into battle, not even congress has control of that, but kerry would place this control under the UN. Folks can you say socialism/communism?
Oh and the new term for socialism is Progressive.
Its a known fact that Jobs are the first to go in a recession and the last to come back after a ression. If you look at the facts we went into a recession in 1998, and it was made worse on 9/11 than it should have been. But now the economy is rebounding and the jobs will come back soon, just that folks have this idea for some reason that they will just appear out of nowhere all of a sudden. As for jobs going overseas, thats the sign of the times. Come on, manufacturing jobs will eventually be gone. For example, who around here has a local Conestoga Wagon dealer down the street from them? IF you do speak up! What no conestoga wagon dealer??? You think there might be a reason for that?
The only reason why people are in a pickle when their jobs go overseas is that they made the wrong decision in choosing their future occupation. Just because mamma and dad worked at the textile mill all their lives doesn''t mean its a good choice for junior to work at the textilem mill when they textile industry left the US 30 years ago.
what is happening is that people today unfortuantely are willing to sacrifice freedom for security. Can you say again, socialism errr Progressive?
Once we give up our freedom, and put in place the implied security the government would hope to give us, we become true slaves with no hope of emancipation. The current democratic party is the catalyst to get this to happen.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 144
|
Whoa! Hold that wagon! As a matter of fact it is not all manufacturing jobs that are going elsewhere. High tech jobs are leaving as well. R&D is heading into India and the old Eastern Block contries. So it seems that no matter what you study to be other than a burger flipper, your job could be gone tomorrow. Further not all people are able to do the high tech stuff. Personally, I am not in that class. I just have the misfortune to be too old and too poor when I was college age to go.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
Well, i was a part of the high tech job industry, and I for one knew that if i didn''t stay ahead of the trend I would be outdated quickly. As a system administrator (computers) if you do not retrain every couple years you would be obsolete. If you don''t work for 6 months in that field your skills are basically useless. The reason is that the technology changes so fast.
The driving force for tech and manufacturing leaving for cheaper countries isn''t the fault of the politicians. It is solely the fault of the consumer!
For example, lets say xyz company sells mice for the computer. They manufacture the parts ship them to china have them assembled for .30 cents a hour and bring them back here and sells them for 30.00 a piece.
Now if xyz company were to hire people here to assemble them, they couldn''t get anyone to do it for less than 10.00 a hour. So then they would have to sell the product for 65.00 per mouse. The consumer won''t pay that, they are a bottom dollar driven and want the cheapest price possible.
SO lets say xyz company does that for principle sake, and hires the 10.00 a hour worker. Pretty soon they will be out of business since they won''t be able to sell the mice. That in turn will not only put those 10.00 a hour worker out of a job but it will also put the people who are making the parts out of a job as well as the sales and marketing people that were trying to sell these mice out of a job.
My folks couldn''t afford to send me to college, so i worked 2 or3 jobs went to school and got my education, as well as raised 5 kids. I didn''t have much while this was happening.
My point is that Not one of us can blame other people for our prediciments we are in. It is totally based on choices we made in our past.
Cheri even though you were too poor to go, it was a choice you made not to go. It basically boils down to the old saying where there is a will there is a way.
Now I am on disability, mostly because its my fault. There was some fraud involved by the insurance company that was paid to protect me in case of a catastrophy. BUT the truth be known, if i had made a better choice, and put more money in investments and saved more money, i would probably have been in a better shape now. But even though I have been knocked down again, I never give up and find another way to do things. Now i have two kids raised and hopefully going to make the right decision to go to college in the near future, and the third one about to go to college as soon as he graduates highschool. My oldest son died in 1997 and my daughter is graduating from Denver school of journalism. ALL will have done it on their own as I am too poor to pay for it.
I agree though that your situation is very tough! But I personally don''t believe that you are too Old to go to college,(My grandmother was in college at 80 years old) and as i said before where theres a will there is a way.
Back to manufacturing jobs. The jobs can be catagorized into ages. Prior to the manufacturing age (ie industrial age), the country was in a agricultural age(farming ect).
when the industrial age came along it modernized and automated farming. That put people out of jobs, lost homes farms ect ect. They survived and retrained and grew from there. The industrial age came to a end somewhere between the 50''s and the 80''s. Not sure exactly when but then the information age came into existance and were suffering the same things the farmers did before the industrial revolution.
Right now the money to be made for the next 50 or so years will be in the services industry as well as the information industry. If you control information, you will make money. If you fix products taht break you will be employed and make money. Thats just the evolution of the economy.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1922
|
I have a prediction: robots.
Here''s the rationale.........service will be in huge demand (aging boomers). Service people will become expensive (they are relatively cheap today). Ergo: the increasing demand for cheap labour. Solution: more immigrants. Problem: terrorism and bigotry and poli/cultural problems. Solution: find service givers with less ''obstacles''.
Fact: electronics are getting more sophisticated all the time. Robots are increasingly evident. Marry the two thoughts = ''everday'' robots will become common.
Suggestion: read up on robotics - find the best five companies. Invest. When the postman comes to the door on little wheels with blinking lights and the press is talking about the ''ROBOTIC'' revolution - SELL. The market just peaked. Look for the next trend and hope that Hollywood was wrong about robots.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
quote:
Originally posted by skruzich
Kerry was a TRAITOR Hoop, he was a communist sympathizer and associated himself with the commie jane fonda! He also disrespected all military veterans with his lack of respect for the medals he was given.
I will tell ya even though president bush has not handled spending well, I would rather put him back in office than put a traitor in office.
I have seen the source of this information and it is this guy that runs a service making money off of the hopes of POW/MIA families. He hates Kerry (and McCain) for their belief that their are none left alive in Vietnam, because he is making money exploiting this fear. He is the same guy that accused McCain of being KGB. He is a nut. Period. They are going to try to do the same thing to Kerry that was done to McCain, and it is embarrassing.
Kerry saved lives during the war by risking his own, how ''bout you? He then realized that the war was unjust and was being fought disproportionately by poor kids, so he protested when he got back. If ANYONE had a right to it was him. This Jane Fonda stuff is crap, he worked with her a very little bit 2 years before she went to Vietnam and didn''t work with her again after she went. You have some gall to accuse him of being a traitor.
BTW, He wasn''t GIVEN any medals, he earned each and everyone of them by spilling his blood for his country. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. Please educate yourself before you spout this BS to anyone else.
Here is the link to the guy pushing this "Commie" stuff about Kerry...
But I suppose you think it is "patiotic" to prey on peoples fears like this jack*ss has been doing for his whole life taking advantage of these families. His name is Ted Sampley:
This is his website, with a digitally altered pic of Kerry on it:
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/
Some more about this guy from Salon.com:
"According to author Susan Katz Keating, who has written extensively on Vietnam veterans and the POW/MIA movement for the Washington Times and Soldier of Fortune magazine, deception is what Sampley does for a living. Her book "Prisoners of Hope: Exploiting the POW-MIA Myth in America," published in 1994 by Random House, exposes how Sampley and his allies abused the hopes of grieving families for fun and profit. Their best-known victim, until now, was Sen. John McCain. He first drew Sampley''s poisonous attention when, along with Kerry, he debunked the idea that Americans were still being held by Vietnam, and endorsed the restoration of diplomatic relations with the Communist government.
Keating describes in detail how, in 1992, Sampley commenced a "scurrilous" crusade to punish McCain:
"Sampley ... accused McCain of being a weak-minded coward who had escaped death by collaborating with the enemy. Sampley claimed that McCain had first been compromised by the Vietnamese, then recruited by the Soviets.
"To those who know McCain and are familiar with his behavior in captivity, the charge is ludicrous. McCain resisted his captors to such a degree that he was isolated in a special prison for troublemakers. He repeatedly refused special favors, including early release, and emerged as a spiritual and religious leader for other prisoners. Nonetheless, Sampley was persistent enough in his claims that the press in McCain''s home state of Arizona picked up on the KGB story."
In 1992, Sampley wrote a long article that portrayed McCain as a "Manchurian candidate," who had betrayed America to the North Vietnamese and then enlisted as a secret Communist agent. But it wasn''t until seven years later that the celebrated Navy pilot and ex-POW found out how much damage such smears could inflict. After McCain declared his presidential candidacy in 1999, Sampley revived the "Manchurian candidate" smear as a convenient weapon for the Senator''s political enemies. Some of them, including the prominent conservative Paul Weyrich and Richard Mellon Scaife''s Newsmax Web site, didn''t hesitate to pick up the slimy stuff generated by Sampley. The fringe assault on McCain, amplified by the likes of Weyrich and talk radio, caused grave injury to his campaign during the pivotal South Carolina primary.
Insinuations of treason are being revived for deployment against Kerry, who happens to be a close friend of McCain (Kerry defended McCain against Sampley, denouncing him as a "stupid ass" in print). The simplest way to tar Kerry as an antiwar extremist -- and indict him for unpatriotic betrayal in the eyes of many vets -- is to pair him with "Hanoi Jane" Fonda. On Monday, Rush Limbaugh published a photograph of Fonda at what appears to be an antiwar rally, under the headline "John Kerry With Hanoi Jane in September, 1970." And indeed, a blurry face about two rows behind her does resemble the young Kerry.
But Limbaugh, like so many who attack Kerry for working with Fonda against the war, distorts reality. Fonda didn''t travel to Hanoi until August 1972. Obviously that was two years after the September 1970 rally and, more important, a year after she joined demonstrations led by Kerry and his fellow vets in Vietnam Veterans Against the War. By the time Fonda visited Hanoi, Kerry was running for Congress in Boston. There''s no evidence that he worked with Fonda after her notorious trip."
And finally:
The Weekly Standard, an ultra-conservative magazine has rebuked all of this, despit looking HARD for any real evidence.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
quote:
Originally posted by skruzich
hildabeast wants the republicans to win this one, if a dem gets office this time, she can''t run in 2008. ;)
But Andy, come on give the national guard thing a rest, they released the records and it shows he was there!
Steve-O,
Did you look at the records or just read Fox''s headlines? He didn''t get paid from April 1972 to OCt 1972, which means in fact that he WASN''T there.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 3005
|
Apemaneve:
Here is one you can not refute. Gen. Giap, in his 1985 memior, clearly stated that the North Vietnam government was ready to end the war, in the favor of the U.S. in 1970. But the actions by Kerry in working to get the U.S. out gave them the will to go on with the war. All those who died after that, Kerry has their blood on his hands. When this information gets out to the veteran community, he will be linched. And all I can say is he will not be missed. He is guilty of treason!
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apemanevo
quote:
Originally posted by skruzich
He then realized that the war was unjust and was being fought disproportionately by poor kids, so he protested when he got back. If ANYONE had a right to it was him. This Jane Fonda stuff is crap, he worked with her a very little bit 2 years before she went to Vietnam and didn''t work with her again after she went. You have some gall to accuse him of being a traitor.
No not gall i call a spade a spade, and kerrys actions were treasonous.
Heres some reasons
The dust jacket of Mr. Kerry''s pro-Hanoi book, "The New Soldier," features a photograph of his ragged band of radicals mocking the US Marine Corps Memorial, which depicts the flag-raising on Iwo Jima, with an upside-down American flag.
Retired Gen. George S. Patton III charged that Mr. Kerry''s actions as an antiwar activist had "given aid and comfort to the enemy," as had the actions of Ramsey Clark and Jane Fonda.
Mr. Kerry lied when he threw what he claimed were his war medals over the White House fence; he later admitted they weren''t his. Now they are displayed on his office wall.
This should be important to yall who keep on talking about President Bush lying! Now you have no excuse if kerry gets office cause yall know hes a liar to begin with.
[quote]
BTW, He wasn''t GIVEN any medals, he earned each and everyone of them by spilling his blood for his country. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. Please educate yourself before you spout this BS to anyone else.
Yeah given medals is what was done. 2 wounds didn''t even interfere with duties, 1 medal 2 days leave, and the silver star was after his crew blasted the hut with a 50 cal machine gun before he even entered it, and came out with a mortar and a rocket launcher. Some how he got a silver star for that.
Yeah i stand on my words, Given the medals.
Isn''t it intersting that his cousin gets the contracts to rebuild the Vietnam rails communications and ports???
And everyone wants to complain about halliburton.
I remember the boys and i mean 17, 18, 19 year olds that came back in closed caskets. Kerry managed to get out of duty from 3 minor wounds. I do not call him a patriot, or a honorable veteran.
I have a 5 letter word for him and it resembles a cats nickname!
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
OK did you see the records?
quote:
Originally posted by Apemanevo
quote:
Originally posted by skruzich
hildabeast wants the republicans to win this one, if a dem gets office this time, she can''t run in 2008. ;)
But Andy, come on give the national guard thing a rest, they released the records and it shows he was there!
Steve-O,
Did you look at the records or just read Fox''s headlines? He didn''t get paid from April 1972 to OCt 1972, which means in fact that he WASN''T there.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
quote:
Originally posted by skruzich
OK did you see the records?
quote:
Originally posted by Apemanevo
quote:
Originally posted by skruzich
hildabeast wants the republicans to win this one, if a dem gets office this time, she can''t run in 2008. ;)
But Andy, come on give the national guard thing a rest, they released the records and it shows he was there!
Steve-O,
Did you look at the records or just read Fox''s headlines? He didn''t get paid from April 1972 to OCt 1972, which means in fact that he WASN''T there.
Yes I did. I read the whole thing. He didn''t get paid from April 1972 to Oct. 1972, the time he was in Alabama. This is the only thing he has been accused of and his own records PROVE he wasn''t participating. And the book you said was Kerry''s - "The New Soldier" - Wasn''t pro-Hanoi..once again steve, do some of your own research before you believe what you hear on right-wing radio. He didn''t even write it the only part in it from him is reprint of his testimony before congress.
And if Kerry is a P*ssy for what he did IN Vietnam, what is GW for his time in the Champaign Brigade? I suppose the guy who came out with his story about Kerry steering his boat INTO fire to save the him after he went over board is lying???
"Searching for proof of Kerry''s alleged anti-American radicalism has frustrated his more intelligent adversaries. The current issue of the Weekly Standard carries a windy account of this ongoing quest by David Skinner, who dug up a copy of the New Soldier, a 1971 antiwar volume that carried Kerry''s byline. Skinner offers a long, dull account of his effort to find a copy of this minor, somewhat moldy period piece -- and when he does, the results are anticlimactic. "Anti-Kerry oppo researchers will be disappointed to learn that Kerry wrote very little of the book," he reveals at long last. "It reprints his [1971] Senate testimony and includes a brief afterword from him." Skinner can''t manage to work up much righteous anger. At the end, he complains that in the midst of the movement''s turmoil, Kerry "was able to have his cake and eat it, too, becoming the establishment, patriotic face of a radical, anti-patriotic movement."
You have been fooled by a party of elites that laugh about what they have gotten you to swallow.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1922
|
I take it that my stock tip on ''robots'' isn''t hitting any nerves?
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1728
|
Thanks Ape
Steve: READ IT ALL. SHRUB claims he "did his duty" but they have YET to find any Alabama Guardsman who remembers he was there. NOW, it''s not like he was just ANYBODY he was a PILOT, and a congressman''s son. Also he has a brother that is making all kinds of financial deals with the Chinese Communist government. You remember that brother he''s the one that had hookers just show up and knock on his door and offer sex. He didn''t want to screw them but it would have been rude not to after his Communist business partners had already paid for them.
AND NOW THE SHRUB QUOTE OF THE DAY: But today I want to talk about what we''re creating in Arkansas, called the Center for State Scholars... and the catalyst will be what they call the Business Roundtable. ... They start interviewing children in 8th grade about their ambitions, and explaining reality. If you don''t have any ambitions, the minimum wage job isn''t going to get you to where you want to get.
-- George W. Bush, Little Rock, Arkansas, Aug. 29, 2002
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
Hrmmmm Andy and apeman, here what to choose between. A traitor who managed to leave his tour of duty early because he recieved three scratches, then early outed from the military because he wanted to run for congress so he called in favors to get out, and when he lost his election campaign because no one had any use for him, then runs with traitors and communists, sets up contracts for his cousin to rebuild a destroyed country, disliked the service so much that he threw his medals over the fence (ohhh ok, he lied about that one huh) and is willing to subject this countries soverienty by placing our military under the UN''s control,
OR a president that has had questions asked about where he was during a certain date but provides proof through pay records that he was there. (just so you know, the military doesn''t pay you if your not where your supposed to be!), taken a impossible situation and dealt with it with afghanistan, and Iraq, and the terrorists.
I take the one who has proven himself a leader, military or civilian, and it certainly isn''t John Kerry.
The only thing kerry has going for him or so he thinks is his vietnam service record. All of the vietnam vets I know personally and that is quite a few, hate his guts. Sounds like they have good reason to hate him too.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
Andy,
30 years is a long time, some of if not most of those folks could be and are probably dead. But its not even a item for consideration anymore, everyone pitched a bitch for proof, he gave them proof. Military pay records. It satisfied the bunch screaming about it. Kerry said today that his position never even said a word about it.
I mean who cares if someone remembers him.
quote:
Originally posted by andydufresne
Thanks Ape
Steve: READ IT ALL. SHRUB claims he "did his duty" but they have YET to find any Alabama Guardsman who remembers he was there. NOW, it''s not like he was just ANYBODY he was a PILOT, and a congressman''s son.
Who cares about his brother?? why is this important???
quote:
Also he has a brother that is making all kinds of financial deals with the Chinese Communist government. You remember that brother he''s the one that had hookers just show up and knock on his door and offer sex. He didn''t want to screw them but it would have been rude not to after his Communist business partners had already paid for them.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 3005
|
Let it go Steve. These mental cases wil not even look at the facts. They are so blinded by their hate that all you are doing is causing your own self heath problems. It would be nice to limit the vote to "sane" people, but that would outlaw all votes from all democrates as none of them are sane. My grandfather called democrates "spineless wonders" as they did not have enough backbone to be able to stand up.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
I am comforted by the simple fact that in number at least, there are more people like me in the country than there are like you. Now if only we would all vote, then things could maybe get better.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 3005
|
No, they would only get much worse. It is your kind that have brought us to the depths of depravity we see all around us every day.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 706
|
OK, DanR. Whatever you say.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 1728
|
Well, THIS is the man you are supporting:
"Actually, I -- this may sound a little West Texan to you, but I like it. When I''m talking about -- when I''m talking about myself, and when he''s talking about myself, all of us are talking about me."
--Hardball, MSNBC, May 31, 2000
STEVE: Why are the men from Kerry''s unit campaigning for him? The BAND OF BROTHERS is traveling around the country to show the truth.
|
|
Joined: 2/23/2007
Posts: 16520
|
Don''t know. But enough vets hate his guts for his actions against the veterans that he won''t have much of a vote there. To these honored men and women he is lower than the enemy they were fighting.
|
|
|
|
