Question for those voting Kerry

[Mr.Vicchio]

Are oyu voting FOR Kerry because you believe in and support him, or are you voting against Bush?


Just curious.

[Zeebadee]

C'mon V, you've said it yourself many times. Anyone that disagrees with anything Bush does is simply a "Bush hater".

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio, Are oyu voting FOR Kerry because you believe in and support him, or are you voting against Bush? Just curious.

I'm sure you know MY answer by now. But let me ask YOU, do you support Bush because you hate KERRY or do you like what he has done as prez?

[PhanthomOps]

http://www.freedomalliance.org/view_articl...le.php?a_id=391
Freedom Alliance
Bring it on, John
by Oliver North - August 27, 2004

"Of course, the president keeps telling people he would never question my service to our country. Instead, he watches as a Republican-funded attack group does just that. Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam, here is my answer: 'Bring it on.'" -- Sen. John Kerry
Dear John,
As usual, you have it wrong. You don't have a beef with President George Bush about your war record. He's been exceedingly generous about your military service. Your complaint is with the 2.5 million of us who served honorably in a war that ended 29 years ago and which you, not the president, made the centerpiece of this campaign.
I talk to a lot of vets, John, and this really isn't about your medals or how you got them. Like you, I have a Silver Star and a Bronze Star. I only have two Purple Hearts, though. I turned down the others so that I could stay with the Marines in my rifle platoon. But I think you might agree with me, though I've never heard you say it, that the officers always got more medals than they earned and the youngsters we led never got as many medals as they deserved.
This really isn't about how early you came home from that war, either, John. There have always been guys in every war who want to go home. There are also lots of guys, like those in my rifle platoon in Vietnam, who did a full 13 months in the field. And there are, thankfully, lots of young Americans today in Iraq and Afghanistan who volunteered to return to war because, as one of them told me in Ramadi a few weeks ago, "the job isn't finished."
Nor is this about whether you were in Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968. Heck John, people get lost going on vacation. If you got lost, just say so. Your campaign has admitted that you now know that you really weren't in Cambodia that night and that Richard Nixon wasn't really president when you thought he was. Now would be a good time to explain to us how you could have all that bogus stuff "seared" into your memory -- especially since you want to have your finger on our nation's nuclear trigger.
But that's not really the problem, either. The trouble you're having, John, isn't about your medals or coming home early or getting lost -- or even Richard Nixon. The issue is what you did to us when you came home, John.
When you got home, you co-founded Vietnam Veterans Against the War and wrote "The New Soldier," which denounced those of us who served -- and were still serving -- on the battlefields of a thankless war. Worst of all, John, you then accused me -- and all of us who served in Vietnam -- of committing terrible crimes and atrocities.
On April 22, 1971, under oath, you told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that you had knowledge that American troops "had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam." And you admitted on television that "yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed."
And for good measure you stated, "(America is) more guilty than any other body, of violations of (the) Geneva Conventions ... the torture of prisoners, the killing of prisoners."
Your "antiwar" statements and activities were painful for those of us carrying the scars of Vietnam and trying to move on with our lives. And for those who were still there, it was even more hurtful. But those who suffered the most from what you said and did were the hundreds of American prisoners of war being held by Hanoi. Here's what some of them endured because of you, John:
Capt. James Warner had already spent four years in Vietnamese custody when he was handed a copy of your testimony by his captors. Warner says that for his captors, your statements "were proof I deserved to be punished." He wasn't released until March 14, 1973.
Maj. Kenneth Cordier, an Air Force pilot who was in Vietnamese custody for 2,284 days, says his captors "repeated incessantly" your one-liner about being "the last man to die" for a lost cause. Cordier was released March 4, 1973.
Navy Lt. Paul Galanti says your accusations "were as demoralizing as solitary (confinement) ... and a prime reason the war dragged on." He remained in North Vietnamese hands until February 12, 1973.
John, did you think they would forget? When Tim Russert asked about your claim that you and others in Vietnam committed "atrocities," instead of standing by your sworn testimony, you confessed that your words "were a bit over the top." Does that mean you lied under oath? Or does it mean you are a war criminal? You can't have this one both ways, John. Either way, you're not fit to be a prison guard at Abu Ghraib, much less commander in chief.
One last thing, John. In 1988, Jane Fonda said: "I would like to say something ... to men who were in Vietnam, who I hurt, or whose pain I caused to deepen because of things that I said or did. I was trying to help end the killing and the war, but there were times when I was thoughtless and careless about it and I'm ... very sorry that I hurt them. And I want to apologize to them and their families."
Even Jane Fonda apologized. Will you, John?

Oliver North is a nationally syndicated columnist and the founder and honorary chairman of Freedom Alliance.

[Scribbler1]

At least North was telling the truth. He slams Kerry because he was against the war. The whole controversy about what the Swift Boat people and what they are saying about Kerry is about what he did AFTER Vietnam and they want to skewer him for it. Therefore they drag out a load of crap about his record IN the service, regardless of the truth of it and indirectly call the militay they CLAIM to support a bunch of liars (as well as Kerry's boat crewmates). They hate him for his anti-war activities but since he was FAR from alone in that sentiment (making that tactic ineffective) are making up a load of garbage to discredit him.

With some help from Kerry's opponent's campaign as well, it would seem.

[Technosoul]

They should of arrested Ollie North for his unpatriotic actives under Bush Sr when the sold arms for hoastages and used the money to fund the unlawful revolution of the Contras, he almost had to take the arrow for those shameful acts but was able to charm America by appearing in full uniform and pretendeing to be the "All Amerian hero" (for the hearings). They should have busted him for knowingly looking the other way as unlawful drugs were smuggled in with the airplanes he used for Reagan's "private" operation in South Ameirca that Congress had ruled agenest.

And what was Ollie North doing in Nam when Bush Jr was taking it easy in the Texas National Guard?

He was flying special bombing missions as part of an agreement with rich poppy plantation owners, they would bomb the poppy fields of the communest growers to put them out of busness so the South Nam (our side) could have a monoply on the market, which funded their soilders, which his bosses sold weapons too.
Not only that but some of the drugs were smuggled back to the USA in the caskets of dead soilders to be sold to finance the secret rightwing "off the shelf" private military. With that capital they managed to collect military equipment being used for the Nam war (logging it in as missing in action) and then shipping that stuff to black markets around the globe, mostly to Arab countries. How do you think Ollie North got a job inside the White House with a desk right outside of Bush's office? Ollie North was never in a fox hole, he was in the RAT HOLE.

Rave on children.

Technosoul.

[Mr.Vicchio]

I am voting for Bush because I respect the man, believe his a strong leader, consistant and I agree with 75% of his policies.

I agree with.. well I never know where Kerry stands from day to day so I cannot say on him.

I wouldn't vote for him because of Edwards, tort reform is HUGE on my list of things I want to see passed, namely medical tort reform, and I cannot believe a man that made 65 million+ on friviluos malpractice lawsuits would support such. Ever.

[Dieval]

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio, I am voting for Bush because I respect the man, believe his a strong leader, consistant and I agree with 75% of his policies. I agree with.. well I never know where Kerry stands from day to day so I cannot say on him. I wouldn't vote for him because of Edwards, tort reform is HUGE on my list of things I want to see passed, namely medical tort reform, and I cannot believe a man that made 65 million+ on friviluos malpractice lawsuits would support such. Ever.

Isn't it funny that you're the only one who answered your own question...well, even came close to answering your quesiton?

I think it's pretty obvious who I'm voting for(Bush)...and I have about the same feeling...I agree with about 75-80% of his policies...

[bishop]

heh.... didn't bush say he was going to push for tort reform in 2000?

i wouldn't hold my breath.

[Sonart]

George W. Bush has committed this country to the biggest political blunder since Vietnam with his ill-concieved, ill-planned adventure in Iraq. He has misled the American people by pandering to fear of dangers that didn't exist, engaged in a war his most experienced generals warned him to avoid, relied on the judgement of his political circle instead of his military, based his analysis on the word of an Iranian spy who Bush's own intellegence agents told him was not to be trusted, and pinned our military down in an intractible quagmire that we can't win, can't get out of and which will accomplish the exact opposite of everything Bush anticipated.

The results will likely be catastrophic, possibly for the world economy, the spread of international terrorism and a blow to American international leadership and trust that will take generations to repair.

Add to that his own domestic agenda resulting in devastating budget deficits, a net loss of jobs, a medicare policy that doesn't work and that everyone it intended to help hates, an education policy that doesn't work and everyone it intended to help hates, the rollback of legislation intended to address possibly the biggest threat to the world, the environment, and his shameless pandering to the religious right.

I am voting for Bush because I respect the man, believe his a strong leader, consistant...

He's a frat boy who made his way through life on other people's money and his father's name, forging an idiotic war based on tough talk and America's desire for making someone - anyone - pay for 9/11. He's a strong, steadfast leader who is steadfastly leading this country into a geo-political black hole that will take decades, if ever, to crawl out of.

John Kerry was never the candidate of my dreams and is showing himself to be even less so, but I'd vote for Lassie before I ever voted to keep George W. Bush in office so he can break something else.

That answer your question?

[Technosoul]

Anyway, what Ollie worte in his newspaper for his Bush people is of no value because we cannot hear Kerry's answer for those opinions.

Such would be like if someone had a trial and you were the defendant but was unaware of the trial, not able to confront the one trying to nail you. Kangaroo courts are pointless. It is like office politics where someone talks behind your back or stabs a knife in your back, and don't even know it until it is too late. It is "dirty politics" at best. Now you might say "but Kerry could answer the charges made by Ollie North", but get real, Kerry is not reading his small fry newletter and is busy bebating the bigger fish, why should he respond to someone who has shamed Ameirca and now pretends to be the all-American Vet? When Kerry made those statements under oath he was speaking on behalf of many Vets who had witnesses the events he discribed, and likewise photos were provided, such as those taken at Tiger Island where prisioners were held. If you can get any real Nam Vet to talk openly you will hear such stories, they ended up hating all "Gooks", on both sides of that civil war. AKA "Police Action" designed to protect the government of South Nam so that the USSR or China would not get a foothold on more property. The Nam conflict was mostly to stand guard to prempt the spreading of a philosophy of communism. (Not to protect people here at home from a clear and present danger from a armed attack on us personally). Just like now we are in Irag with the hope of prempting the spread of anit-American philosophy (before it turns into terrorism or attacks on us here). Such is simular to a crusade to prevent the spread on a non-Chritian religious philosophy or anti-christ philosophy before they can destroy our perspective.

Also during the Nam war the soiders were allowed to get drunk as a skunk and getting high on drugs was popular (even with the troops) and so during those freak out times a lot of crazy stuff could have happened over there, like it did here with the Manson cult. Pot grew wild everywhere in Nam and most other drugs were easy to get a hold of during breaks. Those problems have pretty much been reduced during modern combat duty. We should never blame the troops for the "times" they found their self in back then. War it's self can make people crazy sometimes, as normal morals and values blur in the confusion of killing and constantly attacking people, we should not expect perfect sanity in the middle of a war zone.

PS - war is not a "job".

Technosoul.

[Compugasm]

Originally posted by Technosoul,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Technosoul,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>They should of arrested Ollie North for his unpatriotic actives ... busted him for... How do you think ... Anyway, what Ollie worte in his newspaper ... [/b]

None of your post addresses the statements by Ollie North. Kerry himself can't answer questions posed by a nationally syndicated journalist (in this case Ollie North). So you're reduced to attacking North. Who's braver, the fireman or the policeman? Forget about swifties, typefaces that may/not have existed are what's left?

Originally posted by Technosoul,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Technosoul,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>It is like office politics where someone talks behind your back or stabs a knife in your back, and don't even know it until it is too late.[/b]

Like what Kerry did on national television?

Originally posted by Technosoul, why should he respond to someone who has shamed Ameirca and now pretends to be the all-American Vet?

Like what Kerry did on national television?

Originally posted by Technosoul, If you can get any real Nam Vet to talk openly you will hear such stories..

Like what Kerry did on national television?

<!--QuoteBegin-Technosoul,@
We should never blame the troops for the "times" they found their self in back then.[/quote]
Like what Kerry did on national television?

<!--QuoteBegin-Technosoul,
we should not expect perfect sanity in the middle of a war zone.[/quote]
Like what Kerry will never appologise for on national television?

[kharmajunkie]

If I vote for Kerry, it's solely because I don't want the Reverend Bush putting religious zealots on the court.

[Compugasm]

Kerry supporters don't have a faith? Technosoul might disagree with that. kharmajunkie, what if an arab comes up for appointment? Come on already with the nonsense.

[kharmajunkie]

I didn't question the faith of Kerry supporters nor do I care about said religious faith, it's not an issue to me since I consider it personal. I'm not against faith, just don't legislate it. I don't understand the Arab question you posed but if you mean he is a fundamentalist Muslim whose views are infringing on my freedom then yea, I'm against him. I don't see it as nonsense at all. Bush has yet to prove to me that he cares about the civil liberties and freedoms of all Americans, not just Christians and as a non-Christian I not only feel unrepresented in the Whitehouse; I feel like my President and his administration considers me an enemy. I've never felt that way until our current administration took office.

[RickSp]

I think George Bush and his ilk are a real and present danger to the republic.

I'm not crazy about Kerry, particularly as he seems to have a managed to run a campaign that combines all the worst elements of the Dukaskis and Gore campaigns.

[Gorgo]

If I vote for Kerry, and I probably will, it will only be to vote against Bush. It is apparent that Kerry will continue much of the behavior of the Bush crime family, but hopefully not all.

[bishop]

i actually believe kerry's the best choice available to us. i think his economic plan is very solid - the fact that he's enlisted clinton's advisors goes a long way in my book. i do think that those making $200k/year can handle being taxed more for the public's good. he policy could lower healthcare costs for the nation - which will have a direct benefit to companies that provide benefits and should be counted as a tax cut. i also believe that he would end this policy of pre-emption, especially pre-emption based on a hunch rather than solid information. i believe our allies are hoping he'll be elected, and then hopefully we can work on repairing our alliances and regain focus on hunting the terrorists.

i've read his platform in some depth and it's more republican-esqe than bush's.

[Technosoul]

Or is he suggesting Kerry would appoint an Arab judge to support the enemy of GWN? Come on now..

I think Kerry is a slight step down from Al Gore but I do like his ideas about dealing with the economy much better then Bush trying to buy votes with his tax cut.

Kerry is not involved in any scandle, the reports will come out after the election day about the 9-11 hearings relative to Bush, if enough Democrats end up in Congress impeachment hearings will start and we will have four more years (or less, depending on when Bush will need to resign) of hearings, investigatons, and trials, who wants that? Get Bush away from the red phone while we can.

Kerry has a much better post war plan for Iraq.

Kerry is better informed about environmental issues.

Kerry has more intellegence then Bush and is not as dangerous as Bush.

Kerry can restore the international relatons that Bush flushed down the drain.

Jane Fonda has more balls then George Bush.

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio, Are oyu voting FOR Kerry because you believe in and support him, or are you voting against Bush? ...

One must be a pretty damn fool, to vote on ANY politician who except "promises" offers a claptrap.

Example :
- "I will create *** jobs"
- "I will give all the people health insurance"
- "I will blah, blah, blah"

Anybody can say that (!) and does not need to be running for U.S. President.
Politicians - during a political campaign - say words we are all capable of.
How stupid a person must be, believing in such words ? with nothing behnid as any proof to support such claims ?
Are there majority of people consists simpletons, only ?

Political elections need to undergo major changes in :
- fulfilling promises
A political candidate would HAVE TO comply with its promises. Otherwise he/she is going to be removed from its position, immediately (!)

Example :
- (a political candidate) "president does not *** blah, blah, blah, I will do *** blah, blah, blah"
Realy ?!
Then, WHAT does stop that candidate to go ahead and implant his/her ideas into effect, and give all the people what they need or want ?
"Nothing". He/She lies.

What is the worse part ?
If a candidate is not going to be elected, then all his/her excellent plans (for all the people) would "vanish" and all the people will suffer, only ?!
Bull*** . That is yet another example of lying to all the people.

How long people are going to be so naive ?
I believe that forever. That is us : Mankind.
A restroom is the best place to vote for any politician. It also may give some of us an "extra pleasure" :-)))