Vets Charge: Kerry Killed Fleeing Teen

[>SHOCK<^>WAVE>]

JUST WHAT I WOULD EXPECT FROM A SKULL & BONES BOY

VETS CHARGE: KERRY KILLED FLEEING TEEN; LIED FOR MEDAL

Slaughters Animals, Burns Down Tiny Village
**Exclusive**
A veterans group seeking to deeply discredit Democrat John Kerry&#39;s military service will charge in the new bombshell book UNFIT FOR COMMAND:
"Kerry earned his Silver Star by killing a lone, fleeing, teenage Viet Cong in a loincloth."
"And if Kerry&#39;s superiors had known the truth at the time, they would never have recommended him for the medal."
The book also claims to detail how Kerry personally ordered the slaughter of small animals at a small hamlet along the Song Bo De River.
MORE
The book, set for release next week, hit #1 on the AMAZON hitparade after the DRUDGE REPORT revealed details of the book -- a book the Kerry camapign believes is the"the dirtiest of all dirty tricks ever played on a candidate for the presidency."
The Kerry campaign is planning to vigorously counter the charges and will accuse the veteran&#39;s groups of being well-financed by a top Bush donor from Texas.
The vets have launched a blistering new TV commercial questioning Kerry&#39;s honor and calling him a liar.
MORE
George Bates, an officer in Coastal Division 11, participated in numerous operations with Kerry. In UNFIT FOR COMMAND, Bates recalls a particular patrol with Kerry on the Song Bo De River. He is still "haunted" by the incident:
With Kerry in the lead, the boats approached a small hamlet with three or four grass huts. Pigs and chickens were milling around peacefully. As the boats drew closer, the villagers fled. There were no political symbols or flags in evidence in the tiny village. It was obvious to Bates that existing policies, decency, and good sense required the boats to simply move on.
Instead, Kerry beached his boat directly in the small settlement. Upon his command, the numerous small animals were slaughtered by heavy-caliber machine guns. Acting more like a pirate than a naval officer, Kerry disembarked and ran around with a Zippo lighter, burning up the entire hamlet.
Bates has never forgotten Kerry&#39;s actions.
MORE
UNFIT FOR COMMAND, DRUDGE has learned, claims Kerry "earned his Silver Star by killing a lone, fleeing, teenage Viet Cong in a loincloth."
ARE THE VETS TELLING THE TRUTH?
"They hired a goddamn private investigator to dig up trash&#33;" charged a top Kerry adviser traveling with the senator late Tuesday. "This is pay for play... How low can they go?"
Kerry supporters are comparing the effort by the veterans to the Arkansas State troopers tell-all against Bill Clinton.
MORE
John O&#39;Neill, co-author of UNFIT FOR COMMAND, believes that "Kerry&#39;s Star would never have been awarded had his actions been reviewed through normal channels. In his case, he was awarded the medal two days after the incident with no review. The medal was arranged to boost the morale of Coastal Division 11, but it was based on false and incomplete information provided by Kerry himself."
According to Kerry&#39;s Silver Star citation, Kerry was in command of a three-boat mission on the Dong Cung River. As the boats approached the target area, they came under intense enemy fire. Kerry ordered his boat to attack and all boats opened fire. He then beached directly in front of the enemy ambushers. In the battle that followed, the crews captured enemy weapons. His boat then moved further up the river to suppress more enemy fire. A rocket exploded near Kerry&#39;s boat, and he ordered to charge the enemy. Kerry beached his boat 10 feet from the rocket position and led a landing party ashore to pursue the enemy.
Kerry&#39; citation reads: "The extraordinary daring and personal courage of Lt. Kerry in attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire were responsible for the highly successful mission."
Here&#39;s what O&#39;Neill and the Swiftees say: "According to Kerry&#39;s crewman Michael Madeiros, Kerry had an agreement with him to turn the boat in and onto the beach if fired upon. Each of the three boats involved in the operation was involved in the agreement." O&#39;Neill writes that one crewman even recalls a discussion of probable medals.
Doug Reese, a pro Kerry Army veteran, recounted what happened that day to O&#39;Neill, "Far from being alone, the boats were loaded with many soldiers commanded by Reese and two other advisors. When fired at, Reese&#39;s boat--not Kerry&#39;s--was the first to beach in the ambush zone. Then Reese and other troops and advisors (not Kerry) disembarked, killing a number of Viet Cong and capturing a number of weapons. None of the participants from Reese&#39;s boat received Silver Stars.
O&#39;Neill continues: "Kerry&#39;s boat moved slightly downstream and was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade. . . .A young Viet Cong in a loincloth popped out of a hole, clutching a grenade launcher, which may or may not have been loaded. . . Tom Belodeau, a forward gunner, shot the Viet Cong with an M-60 machine gun in the leg as he fled. . . . Kerry and Medeiros (who had many troops in their boat) took off, perhaps with others, and followed the young Viet Cong and shot him in the back, behind a lean to."
O&#39;Neill concludes "Whether Kerry&#39;s dispatching of a fleeing, wounded, armed or unarmed teenage enemy was in accordance with the customs of war, it is very clear that many Vietnam veterans and most Swiftees do not consider this action to be the stuff of which medals of any kind are awarded; nor would it even be a good story if told in the cold details of reality. There is no indication that Kerry ever reported that the Viet Cong was wounded and fleeing when dispatched. Likewise, the citation simply ignores the presence of the soldiers and advisors who actually &#39;captured the enemy weapons&#39; and routed the Viet Cong. . . . [and] that Kerry attacked a &#39;numerically superior force in the face of intense fire&#39; is simply false. There was little or no fire after Kerry followed the plan. . . . The lone, wounded, fleeing young Viet Cong in a loincloth was hardly a force superior to the heavily armed Swift Boat and its crew and the soldiers carried aboard."
DRUDGE learns from UNFIT FOR COMMAND that if Kerry&#39;s superior officers knew the truth, they would never have recommended the award:
"Admiral Roy Hoffmann, who sent a Bravo Zulu (meaning "good work"), to Kerry upon learning of the incident, was very surprised to discover in 2004 what had actually occurred. Hoffmann had been told that Kerry had spontaneously beached next to the bunker and almost single-handedly routed a bunkered force in Viet Cong. He was shocked to find out that Kerry had beached his boat second in a preplanned operation, and that he had killed a single, wounded teenage foe as he fled."
"Commander Geoge Elliott, who wrote up the initial draft of Kerry&#39;s Silver Star citation, confirms that neither he, nor anyone else in the Silver Star process that he knows, realized before 1996 that Kerry was facing a single, wounded young Viet Cong fleeing in a loincloth. While Commander Elliott and many other Swiftees believe that Kerry committed no crime in killing the fleeing, wounded enemy (with a loaded or empty launcher), others feel differently. Commander Elliott indicates that a Silver Star recommendation would not have been made by him had he been aware of the actual facts."
Developing....

http://www.drudgereport.com/ufd1.htm

[spinningfreemanny]

I just heard the Vet advertisement; rather combative...Nice to take the snippet of the Edwards ad and turn it around so.

[hobbes]

Kerry earned his Silver Star by killing a lone, fleeing, teenage Viet Cong in a loincloth

UNFIT FOR COMMAND, DRUDGE has learned, claims Kerry "earned his Silver Star by killing a lone, fleeing, teenage Viet Cong in a loincloth."

A young Viet Cong in a loincloth popped out of a hole, clutching a grenade launcher

The lone, wounded, fleeing young Viet Cong in a loincloth was hardly a force superior to the heavily armed Swift Boat

Kerry was facing a single, wounded young Viet Cong fleeing in a loincloth.

So what was Kerry wearing?

[3RA1N1AC]

any minute now, the conservatives and middle-of-the-roaders who poo-poo michael moore&#39;s unscholarly/unscientific methods are going to likewise take this thread to task for bringing us anecdotal election season mud-slinging from a gossip column...

... right? *looks at the clock*

[spinningfreemanny]

aww come on, this is almost elementary to the 3 years of bush being compared from genitalia to Hitler.

and 21 congressional medal of honor winners that back bush are not a "gossip column"

[Biggles]

Rather late in the day for such a revelation from these individuals. If such a war crime took place where was their moral indignation all these 40 years. It has long been suggested that the Vietnam war was peppered with such instances and that war crimes abound. Perhaps it is time a very detailed examination was made of all who participated in that war and how they won their medals.

On the other hand, it looks like a partisan attack, sounds like one and by golly it tastes like one. If proved to be so it may actually work against Bush even if his campaign had nothing to do with this.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Biggles@5 August 2004 - 15:00
Rather late in the day for such a revelation from these individuals. If such a war crime took place where was their moral indignation all these 40 years.

On the other hand, it looks like a partisan attack, sounds like one and by golly it tastes like one. If proved to be so it may actually work against Bush even if his campaign had nothing to do with this.
Took the words out of my mouth.

People seem to scream very loud...........near election time.

I recall

Paula Jones and Bill Clinton
Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas
etc, etc.

<_<

edit: If true, it would explain why he wanted to throw his medals away.

[j2k4]

Without addressing this, um.....revelation, I must say that the whole issue of Kerry&#39;s military service and the odd behavior(s) exhibited on his return from the war to be very peculiar, to say the least.

Gravity has a similar effect on all chips; what shakes out is more a function of where they land, rather than how quickly they fall.

Sounds like a soon-to-be non-event, to me. ;)

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by spinningfreemanny@5 August 2004 - 10:10
and 21 congressional medal of honor winners that back bush are not a "gossip column"
these complaints do sound like gossip to me because, like biggles and busyman say, they were not made anywhere near the time that the event supposedly happened, despite describing both cowardly and monstrous behavior on kerry&#39;s part which would gnaw at the soul of any man who were to witness such a thing. and it contradicts everything that&#39;s been revealed by his military records which are the only "evidence" of his conduct in vietnam that can be said with any certainty to not be influenced by people&#39;s opinions of kerry as a politician.

kerry has been trotting out veterans to support his campaign, including a few who served with him, and one who says that kerry saved his life. the speculation goes that these guys have been paid by the democrats to vouch for him. none of us know for certain that they are on the payroll, but it&#39;s plausible, no?

by that logic it&#39;s also plausible that kerry&#39;s political opponents might get the very same idea, pay some vets to say he&#39;s the worst soldier ever to lace up a pair of boots, and hire a writer (who nixon had previously tapped to publically feud with kerry in the &#39;70s) to do the novelization. by the time anyone bothers to check up on how many of the 21 medal of honor recipients actually served with kerry, and whether any of &#39;em may just be holding a grudge for his post-enlistment politics, the damage will be done.

i&#39;m actually not even a fan of john kerry. i&#39;ve never voted for a democrat and don&#39;t intend to, anytime soon. but this story has all the earmarks of a by-the-numbers smear job. it would be a fitting "tit for tat" response to the political accusation of bush going AWOL from the national guard... except kerry&#39;s military records have his superior officers saying he served admirably, in contradiction to the accusation, while bush&#39;s records have gone AWOL. it doesn&#39;t help that the story&#39;s taken from the drudge report (a self-described partisan gossip site) which credits a professional character assassin as the source. the FST News & Events board and its generally thoughtful denizens (righties, lefties, and "others") are above that, as they&#39;re above using michael moore as the ultimate source of their facts. at least, i like to think it is. ;)

just sayin&#39;, >SHOCK<^>WAVE> posted a campaign ad rather than a topic for debate.

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by j2k4@5 August 2004 - 12:33
Sounds like a soon-to-be non-event, to me. ;)
i let my response stew for a few minutes before pressing the button, woulda added a line for this if i&#39;d seen your post. but... um... yes. we seem to agree that, opinions about the senator aside, it&#39;s a pretty flimsy story... or at least one that won&#39;t be kicking around for too long given the chances of it ever being verified.

[hobbes]

I was not being flippant when I posted before, just obtuse.

When one see&#39;s the line "lone, wounded fleeing boy in a loin cloth" once, one switches on the official John Pilger "emotive bullshit" detector.

By the 5th time this comes around, the detector is smoking and about to blow.

It is just another post that attempts the win the reader over by manipulating his emotions.

Slaughtering small animals- another nice vague line that puts the picture of switch blades under puppy dog&#39;s necks. Implies a sense of pointless killing motivated by a sick man.



Points should be jotted down for J2 for breaking party lines on this one.

http://www.sfusd.k12.ca.us/programs/cipd/middle/lessons/teacherlessons/rebecca_renard/imageSBV.JPG

[BigBank_Hank]

I’ll wait for more on this to come out before I comment.

But if it is true I’m sure there’s video documentation. Kerry loved to patrol around Vietnam with his video camera so there might be some video evidence of this.

[Biggles]

Originally posted by hobbes@5 August 2004 - 21:50
I was not being flippant when I posted before, just obtuse.

When one see&#39;s the line "lone, wounded fleeing boy in a loin cloth" once, one switches on the official John Pilger "emotive bullshit" detector.

By the 5th time this comes around, the detector is smoking and about to blow.

It is just another post that attempts the win the reader over by manipulating his emotions.

Slaughtering small animals- another nice vague line that puts the picture of switch blades under puppy dog&#39;s necks. Implies a sense of pointless killing motivated by a sick man.



Points should be jotted down for J2 for breaking party lines on this one.

http://www.sfusd.k12.ca.us/programs/cipd/middle/lessons/teacherlessons/rebecca_renard/imageSBV.JPG
I rather liked the bit about small animals. It drew pictures of pet gerbils ruthlessly slaughtered by heavy machine gun fire and a man afraid to attack bigger animals (like cats) with said heavy machine.

Artless springs to mind

[j2k4]

Originally posted by hobbes@5 August 2004 - 16:50
Points should be jotted down for J2 for breaking party lines on this one.


Oh, thou devine cynic&#33;




Don&#39;t get any ideas, chum.

No lines were crossed during the formulation of my post.




My name is j2k4, and I approve this message.

[spinningfreemanny]

Originally posted by MPC.DE@6 August 2004 - 00:01
http://www.mpcforum.com/
A plethra of information you are;

Honestly this is getting a lot more talk then I ever would have expected. I think that the DNC made a mistake on so vehemently advocating denouncement from the GOP.

[spinningfreemanny]

Hey, 2 stars&#33;

for fearlessly commandeering threads solo against 5 libs :01:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by spinningfreemanny@5 August 2004 - 19:08
Hey, 2 stars&#33;

for fearlessly commandeering threads solo against 5 libs :01:
Well done, that. :)

A small reward, &#39;tis true, but.... :D

[Biggles]

Originally posted by spinningfreemanny@6 August 2004 - 00:08
Hey, 2 stars&#33;

for fearlessly commandeering threads solo against 5 libs :01:
:o

That is no way to talk about Hank.

[clocker]

Originally posted by j2k4@5 August 2004 - 17:54

Don&#39;t get any ideas, chum.

No lines were crossed during the formulation of my post.

But were any small animals injured?
Specifically, animals wearing loincloths....

[Busyman]

Originally posted by spinningfreemanny@5 August 2004 - 20:08
Hey, 2 stars&#33;

for fearlessly commandeering threads solo against 5 libs :01:
Where&#39;d you get this "commandeering" shit&#33;&#33;&#33; :P

[BigBank_Hank]

Originally posted by Biggles+6 August 2004 - 12:22--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Biggles @ 6 August 2004 - 12:22)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-spinningfreemanny@6 August 2004 - 00:08
Hey, 2 stars&#33;

for fearlessly commandeering threads solo against 5 libs :01:
:o

That is no way to talk about Hank. [/b][/quote]
:lol: :lol: :lol:

[spinningfreemanny]

Lol, I&#39;m sure that it&#39;s free for interpretation. B)

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker+6 August 2004 - 13:11--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 6 August 2004 - 13:11)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@5 August 2004 - 17:54

Don&#39;t get any ideas, chum.

No lines were crossed during the formulation of my post.

But were any small animals injured?
Specifically, animals wearing loincloths.... [/b][/quote]
What specie? :huh:

[clocker]

Flees.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@6 August 2004 - 20:03
Flees.
Ah-

As I am given to understand, they are often found hanging around "party lines".

I had almost forgotten; haven&#39;t had a party line since childhood. :lol:

[cpt_azad]

Originally posted by spinningfreemanny@5 August 2004 - 10:10
aww come on, this is almost elementary to the 3 years of bush being compared from genitalia to Hitler.

and 21 congressional medal of honor winners that back bush are not a "gossip column"
lmao

[Rat Faced]

Doesnt anyone bother Checking Facts (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231) any more?

The Boat that was "A few Yards Away" was actually about 700 yards away for starters, according to another book released quite some time ago.

The Dr that "Treated him" isnt the one that treated him according to the Medical Records, and no one can recall ever hearing of the guy.

And people that condemned him in the ad and book have already withdrawn their statements as "a terrible mistake".


The whole group gets more than half their finance from Bob R Perry, who gives millions to the republican party in 3 States and also Federally.

Jees, they are saying he got a Purple Heart for shrapnel in the ass that was self inflicted... he laughs at that himself. He got it for his arm, which was injured the same day, his ass isnt mentioned in the commendation.


Strange then, that his crewmates and the guys that were actually close to him in the action... are all on his side, huh?



He still sounds like a dickhead, but considering the alternative, he gets my support.

[Darth Sushi]

10 bucks it&#39;s a republican veteran making the accusation.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@7 August 2004 - 15:45

Strange then, that his crewmates and the guys that were actually close to him in the action... are all on his side, huh?




They are? :huh:

http://www.swiftvets.com/

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by j2k4+7 August 2004 - 18:44--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 &#064; 7 August 2004 - 18:44)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@7 August 2004 - 15:45

Strange then, that his crewmates and the guys that were actually close to him in the action... are all on his side, huh?




They are? :huh:

http://www.swiftvets.com/ [/b][/quote]
depends on how you interpret "close to him." the anti-kerry guys say they were further away (on other boats) than the pro-kerry guys (on the same boat), but that their opinions are more valid because they outranked kerry&#39;s subordinates. doesn&#39;t really contradict Rat&#39;s statement, imho. since they invoke the hierarchical structure of the u.s. military, though, it also follows that one&#39;s peers are no more entitled to pass judgment than one&#39;s subordinates are, &#39;cause the military is not a democracy. in rare circumstances, peers do submit comments about each other, but review of one&#39;s performance is ultimately the domain of his superiors. the premise provided by Swift Boat Vets For Truth, as to why one must pay any more attention to their accusations than to the available documents or kerry&#39;s former crew, is sort of weak.

[j2k4]

Then my question would be, if quite literally everyone is of the opinion Kerry&#39;s service was so laudable and over-the-top heroic, why does there seem to be such dissent on the part of those who were there over exactly how to characterize it? :huh:

There is definitely smoke here, though neither the fire nor it&#39;s nature may ever be revealed.

In my opinion, the vitriollic flavor of some of the commentary is as acidic as standard-issue Bush-hate.

[Rat Faced]

J2K4,

A book was published a while back saying that the other boat was 700 yds away.. they are now claiming they were "a few yards away".

This contradicts his own crew, and the guy he rescued.

What im saying is that the accusers, judging by where their money and loyalties lie, are not exactly an unbiased lot.

And at least one of them has already publically retracted what is shown in their book and the ad.


I aint saying who&#39;s right... the system of getting Medals in the US Forces has always been a mystery to Brits... you seem to get them for opening the doors for officers as much as anything :ph34r:

[BigBank_Hank]

RF honestly I could really care less what he did or didn’t do in Vietnam. This wouldn’t even be an issue if he would stop ramming it down everyone’s throats even 10 seconds. He is solely to blame for this entire mess because he constantly is trumpeting his Vietnam record.

And on the Vet how made a statement then said he changed his mind: in typical Kerry fashion he to has changed his mind again, now he’s sticking by his original statement.

[j2k4]

Just so.

My point is that opinions as to the exact nature of Kerry&#39;s service seem to run the gamut, and in most cases are sincerely held.

Heroism of the type he is said to have exhibited would, I think, be a straight-up, straightforward proposition; I wonder therefore why there is this diametric opposition?

If officers of his own peerage are willing to denounce him, I&#39;m betting it&#39;s because they&#39;ve taken umbrage at his conduct upon his return from Viet Nam.

I don&#39;t like Kerry, that&#39;s not a secret, and one of the reasons is the political opportunism he demonstrated when he came back; it doesn&#39;t quite square with his much-touted actions in the field:

"I, along with everybody else, committed horrible crimes over in &#39;Nam, and I&#39;m here to tell you we shouldn&#39;t be over there, but boy, was I heroic, you should have seen me-I was one gung-ho S.O.B.; I&#39;ve got it all on film, wanna see it?"


????

[BigBank_Hank]

J2,

Don’t you find it funny how when Kerry’s war record comes into question everyone’s questioning his patriotism, but what about when all the libs were screaming that Bush went AWOL? President Bush has to dig up old military pay stubs to prove that he did not go AWOL, but when Kerry comes under fire it’s a non issue and we’re questioning his patriotism.

I could care less either way because Kerry’s 20 year voting record is what sealed the deal for me not his service in Vietnam.

[clocker]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@9 August 2004 - 14:20


I could care less either way because Kerry’s 20 year voting record is what sealed the deal for me not his service in Vietnam.
Kerry&#39;s service record IS an issue simply becase Bush has put the country into a military stance...we have troops on the ground, actively invading another country.
This is no hit-and-run op...hell, even Tommy Franks now says we&#39;re going to be in there for five years.
The fact that Kerry has experienced war on a personal level would certainly seem to be a positive qualification, given the times.
Furthermore, in my experience it is not uncommon for Vietnam vets to be of two minds about their service during that war.
Keep in mind, I am a direct peer to most of that group (college deferment for me) and now, with the perspective afforded by the passage of 35 years, many of the participants are not as gung-ho as once they were.

Hank, if Bush had possessed ANY record of government service prior to becoming govenor and then President, you can bet HIS voting records would be riddled with the "Flip-Flops" the Republicans are so fond of smearing Kerry with.
Heck, just since the beginning of his Presidency Bush has swapped position many times on major issues.
Remember the famous "We&#39;re not going to be a nation-builder" plank from the 2000 Republican convention plank?
Or the promise to increase the Federal budget surplus?
Hmmm?
Fact is, you&#39;d be hard pressed to find even a single promise that Bush made in order to win the Presidency that he has kept.

[spinningfreemanny]

tax cuts

easy
:D

[clocker]

Originally posted by spinningfreemanny@9 August 2004 - 16:20
tax cuts

easy
:D
Which benefitted corporations and the very rich...not exactly what I remember the promise being.
Furthermore, cutting taxes at all while wildly increasing the federal budget and dramatically increasing spending for the Iraq war is so amazingly stupid and wrongheaded that even Republicans are balking at the Federal budget he proposes.
Of course, why should Bush care?
Even should he win in November and retain office for 4 more years ( I shudder at the thought) it&#39;s going to be his successor who will have to deal with the disaster that Bush and his harebrained economic policies are going to leave behind.

[spinningfreemanny]

I don&#39;t know about you but my family got a cool grand out of it ;)

Edit: and were not rich at all

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank+9 August 2004 - 11:25--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (BigBank_Hank &#064; 9 August 2004 - 11:25)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>ramming it down everyone’s throats[/b]
:lol: interesting choice of words. is there anything the other major candidate could possibly say or do, that you&#39;d describe as "throat ramming"? WMD? Mission Accomplished? those Christmas videos of his dog (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031211-7.html) that ran on every news channel? it seems like (not counting time spent thumbing through Penthouse Forum at the 7-11) i only ever read "ram it down my throat" in reference to things that one disagrees with, similar to how one usually only calls someone a whiner when one disagrees with him.

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4
If officers of his own peerage are willing to denounce him, I&#39;m betting it&#39;s because they&#39;ve taken umbrage at his conduct upon his return from Viet Nam.[/quote]
i&#39;d bet similarly. to speculate further would prolly be foolish, so i&#39;ll leave it at that.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@9 August 2004 - 16:20
I could care less either way because Kerry’s 20 year voting record is what sealed the deal for me not his service in Vietnam.
Oh it wasn&#39;t the fact that you blindly vote Republican? :lol: :lol: :lol:

You act like you gave Kerry a chance..... Please. <_<

Keep in mind Bush has already lost.

Liberals and Democrats are gonna vote Kerry.
Many Republicans have switched sides to Kerry.
People who previously didn&#39;t vote will vote for Kerry.
Republicans have not gained anymore than the previously election.

He supports outsourcing jobs to India wtf&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;. :blink:

[BigBank_Hank]

Originally posted by clocker@9 August 2004 - 17:12
Kerry&#39;s service record IS an issue simply becase Bush has put the country into a military stance...we have troops on the ground, actively invading another country.
This is no hit-and-run op...hell, even Tommy Franks now says we&#39;re going to be in there for five years.
The fact that Kerry has experienced war on a personal level would certainly seem to be a positive qualification, given the times.
Furthermore, in my experience it is not uncommon for Vietnam vets to be of two minds about their service during that war.
Keep in mind, I am a direct peer to most of that group (college deferment for me) and now, with the perspective afforded by the passage of 35 years, many of the participants are not as gung-ho as once they were.

Hank, if Bush had possessed ANY record of government service prior to becoming govenor and then President, you can bet HIS voting records would be riddled with the "Flip-Flops" the Republicans are so fond of smearing Kerry with.
Heck, just since the beginning of his Presidency Bush has swapped position many times on major issues.
Remember the famous "We&#39;re not going to be a nation-builder" plank from the 2000 Republican convention plank?
Or the promise to increase the Federal budget surplus?
Hmmm?
Fact is, you&#39;d be hard pressed to find even a single promise that Bush made in order to win the Presidency that he has kept.
Anyone can say something and change their mind but no one does it like Senator flip flop. He even flopped during his own speech at the convention. One minute he tells President Bush that it time to run a positive campaign but in the same speech he hammering on the war in Iraq and pollutants.

Kerry’s record is an issue because he made it an issue. What’s his brilliant plan to bring peace to Iraq? All he ever keeps saying is he’s going to go to the UN. Haven’t we been through this before? We put it to a vote before we went in there.

Tommy Franks is without a doubt correct in his assumption that we will have troops there from 5 years. We have troops on duty all over the world.


Edited for Busyman:

Bush supports outsourcing?

You better not ask Senator Kerry’s wife made most of her fortune then.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@9 August 2004 - 20:56
Edited for Busyman:

Bush supports outsourcing?

You better not ask Senator Kerry’s wife made most of her fortune then.
I&#39;m sorry I didn&#39;t know Senator Kerry&#39;s wife was the President of our country.

Tax cuts during wartime that Bush got us into.
Supports outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries which only benefits the executives and shareholders of companies.
Can&#39;t talk worth 2 shits unless it&#39;s a speech. (and can even fuck that up so forget him being a "diplomatic President")

[BigBank_Hank]

Originally posted by Busyman@9 August 2004 - 20:31
I&#39;m sorry I didn&#39;t know Senator Kerry&#39;s wife was the President of our country.
Apparently you are also unaware that her husband is running to be President.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank+9 August 2004 - 21:59--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (BigBank_Hank @ 9 August 2004 - 21:59)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@9 August 2004 - 20:31
I&#39;m sorry I didn&#39;t know Senator Kerry&#39;s wife was the President of our country.
Apparently you are also unaware that her husband is running to be President. [/b][/quote]
I know that but what are you on about otherwise?

[BigBank_Hank]

Oh I guess that’s one little thing that he forgot to mention during his speech at the convention. See Senator Kerry is firmly against “Benedict Arnold” companies as he likes to call them but in reality he and his wife have made millions from the outsourced employers of the Heinz corporation.

[Alex H]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank
Kerry’s record is an issue because he made it an issue. What’s his brilliant plan to bring peace to Iraq? All he ever keeps saying is he’s going to go to the UN. Haven’t we been through this before? We put it to a vote before we went in there.

No, you didn&#39;t put it to a vote before the US went in to Iraq. The US said "We&#39;re going to invade Iraq. We&#39;d like you guys in the UN to come with us to help pay for the damage, but if you don&#39;t want to you can get fucked cause we&#39;re gonna do it anyway".
There was hardly any debate, because the outcome was always going to be the invasion of Iraq, whether it was sanctioned by the UN or not.

Perhaps Kerry&#39;s idea of begging forgiveness from the UN will make it&#39;s member countries less hostile to America in the future, which, with a global economy and trading becoming easier would be a good thing for the US. You guys are really well positioned in the market place. No matter how much you think you own it, perhaps erring on the side of caution and being nice to other countries would be a pleasant change.

It would certainly be a novelty.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@9 August 2004 - 22:58
Oh I guess that’s one little thing that he forgot to mention during his speech at the convention. See Senator Kerry is firmly against “Benedict Arnold” companies as he likes to call them but in reality he and his wife have made millions from the outsourced employers of the Heinz corporation.
Ok is he for outsourcing work to foreign countries or not? :blink:

[BigBank_Hank]

Well you see its ok for he and his wife to make millions but it’s not ok for the US to loose jobs to other countries. Got it?

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@9 August 2004 - 23:09
Well you see its ok for he and his wife to make millions but it’s not ok for the US to loose jobs to other countries. Got it?
You still are batting the Bush explaining this. You are speaking to a person who has no knowledge of Kerry making millions outsourcing work to foreign countries.

Enlighten me damnit&#33;&#33;&#33;

Translation: Give me the lowdown. ;)

[BigBank_Hank]

Ever hear of the Heinz corporation? Now how about Teresa Heinz Kerry?

They have a little company that makes ketchup and a nice chuck of the business is done overseas. So is it ok for the Heinz company to make millions from outscored jobs while Kerry says he’s against it?

Hell if it wasn’t for the Heinz company there’d be no money to fund his whole campaign.

[vidcc]

Hienz is a worldwide company so it makes it&#39;s product in the countries it sells in. I believe that the products sold in this country are made here. Are you suggesting that it only makes it in the USA and exports?
The outsourcing that is being complained about is things like tech support jobs going to india or nike making their shoes in asia and importing them here, as far as i see it.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@9 August 2004 - 23:22
Ever hear of the Heinz corporation? Now how about Teresa Heinz Kerry?

They have a little company that makes ketchup and a nice chuck of the business is done overseas. So is it ok for the Heinz company to make millions from outscored jobs while Kerry says he’s against it?

Hell if it wasn’t for the Heinz company there’d be no money to fund his whole campaign.
Okayyyyyy.

I mean what jobs do they outsource?

Do they have Indians packing the ketchup or what?

[BigBank_Hank]

Vid,

Aren’t Dell, Nike, and ect worldwide companies?

On a side note you mentioned tech support guys being Indian. I mean no offense to anyone from India when I say this but I hate when I have to talk to those guys on the phone. I can never understand a damn thing that they are saying and I have to keep asking them to repeat themselves.

[3RA1N1AC]

i hate it when Indians always try to ram their "hey this is not a public library, either buy it or get out" down my throat, while i&#39;m trying to enjoy a little Penthouse Forum.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@9 August 2004 - 21:40
Vid,

Aren’t Dell, Nike, and ect worldwide companies?

On a side note you mentioned tech support guys being Indian. I mean no offense to anyone from India when I say this but I hate when I have to talk to those guys on the phone. I can never understand a damn thing that they are saying and I have to keep asking them to repeat themselves.
My point is, when i gave the example is that companies like nike and Dell moved jobs out of America as they could save money by taking advantage of cheap labor.
Hienz is a "food" company (forgetting any other connections) and manufactures where it sells. It wouldn&#39;t be economically viable to produce everything here and export it. The company expanded over the years, it didn&#39;t "shut down and move" as far as i am aware.

I agree it may be possible that they have administration in another country but i am unaware of this as a fact.

As to Dell and your language problems i believe they had a change of heart and moved back here after too many customer complaints. But they were just examples.

besides read this (http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/heinz.asp)

[BigBank_Hank]

I never claimed that he and his wife owned the company just profited from it.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 09:46
I never claimed that he and his wife owned the company just profited from it.
i haven&#39;t suggested you made that claim. all i have done is point out that the heinz "outsourcing" claim was bogus....unless one wants to make the same claim about all multinational companies that work in the same manner.
Outsourcing is where they replace American jobs with those abroad to do something that is for use in our country. For example an American clothing company closing it&#39;s production lines in the states and moving it to asia then importing those clothes back here to sell. Not when they open new factories etc. to make a product or service for the country that factory is located in....thats called expansion.
To put it in perspective.
A german company that makes sausages decides to set up production in the USA. Should it only employ Germans in that factory as some right wingers have suggested the heinz company should be doing with Americans?
Heinz hasn&#39;t closed American factories and transfered the jobs abraod...they have expanded by opening factories in a location that isn&#39;t within the USA.

Outsourcing is bad for the American worker and shows that corporate patriotism sleeps with the dollar and not with the nation, but then that&#39;s business :(

[BigBank_Hank]

I wonder why they decided to expand their companies overseas instead of creating jobs in America. Do you think that cheap labor rates may have played a part? Nah. I bet it never crossed their minds.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 12:17
I wonder why they decided to expand their companies overseas instead of creating jobs in America. Do you think that cheap labor rates may have played a part? Nah. I bet it never crossed their minds.
Perhaps because the USA market although vast is finite and they wanted to expand to make more money and the only way is to trade outside the USA.
Think about it. How much would in this case Heinz have to charge for a bottle of ketchup sold in france if they manufactured it in the USA and had to cover the distribution costs? nobody would buy it and therefore make it a pointless task and reduce the share value of an American company.

[Busyman]

Hank, here I actually thought you had some juicy information and now I see you are talking out the side of your neck.

That&#39;s like saying McDonald&#39;s outsources by building restaurants abroad.

You are truly an #4iot. I can&#39;t believe...well fuck it&#33;&#33;&#33; No wonder America is fucked up.

Talk about the uninformed or spin doctor. <_<

Your argument (in this case) against Kerry is shitted on.

Ahhhh...but what about Bush hmmmmmmmm.

Apparently it&#39;s ok for Bush to back sending jobs abroad.

He&#39;s so patriotic.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 18:17
I wonder why they decided to expand their companies overseas instead of creating jobs in America. Do you think that cheap labor rates may have played a part? Nah. I bet it never crossed their minds.
Because the American Market is only so big.

Out of 6 Billion, you only have 300 Million inhabitants... so i guess they wanted to compete in other countries too?

Just like many American Companies... they arent all outsourcing.

I think your mixing up too seperate issues Hank...

expansion = good for profit AND USA (or where ever the company is based)

outsourcing = good for profit BUT bad for USA (or wher ever the company is based)

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Rat Faced+10 August 2004 - 15:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rat Faced @ 10 August 2004 - 15:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 18:17
I wonder why they decided to expand their companies overseas instead of creating jobs in America. Do you think that cheap labor rates may have played a part? Nah. I bet it never crossed their minds.
Because the American Market is only so big.

Out of 6 Billion, you only have 300 Million inhabitants... so i guess they wanted to compete in other countries too?

Just like many American Companies... they arent all outsourcing.

I think your mixing up too seperate issues Hank...

expansion = good for profit AND USA (or where ever the company is based)

outsourcing = good for profit BUT bad for USA (or wher ever the company is based) [/b][/quote]
You know Rat, I believe Hank knew the difference but this was typical spin.

[vidcc]

my god there IS an echo in here :lol: :lol: :lol:

[BigBank_Hank]

The Heinz company owns 79 plants and 57 of them are overseas. The products can be made just as easily here as and shipped overseas creating more jobs at home.

Now I understand that its good for business to expand and create jobs in other markets, which is exactly what the Heinz company did. Kerry has been accusing Bush of essentially encouraging the loss of jobs overseas when those very same corporate strategies are the same as the Heinz Corp.

[vidcc]

Ok hank of the 22 plants heinz has in the states..where are they located?

I&#39;ll tell you, all over the place

Why?

Because it make logistical and economic sense to make the product closer to the customer.

Now how much has the cost of fuel gone up?

A great deal

what does that mean to any industry?

Logistics cost more and the further away the customer the more it costs to transport.


what does this mean?

it means that the product sale price has to increase to be able to make the a profit and pay for the cost of the logistics.

But if the price is expensive who will buy it?

Very few, they will buy the locally produced product that is much cheaper.


just in the states large companies have factories at different ends of the country purely to make the logistics cheaper and the product viable.

would you pay &#036;15 for a bottle of ketchup?

But i agree with your thinking...lets close down all the foriegn companies operating branches here that give americans jobs or open our employment laws so foreign companies can bring in their own workers.

[Biggles]

Heinz would only be outsourcing if the ketchup made in the UK was then shipped back to the States putting US workers out of a job. If a product is to be sold in a specific country (especially foodstuffs) then it is more practical to make it in that country.

Even beers etc., are bottled over here.

Coca Cola is made here, Fords are made here etc., etc., These are not outsourced jobs they are an attempt to be competitive in a foreign market. If Heinz tried to ship ketchup here, shipping costs, import duties etc., would make the product uncompetitive and locally produced items would take all their market share.

It tends to be luxury high cost (in relation to shipping size) items that are imported i.e. DKNY, Jack Daniels and similar.

Out-sourcing is getting a little Thai girl to work 23 hours a day to make &#036;200 trainers (that used to be made in the US) specifically for the US market. The only difference being that she gets paid a &#036;1 a day.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by vidcc@10 August 2004 - 15:17
my god there IS an echo in here :lol: :lol: :lol:
:D

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 17:31
The Heinz company owns 79 plants and 57 of them are overseas. The products can be made just as easily here as and shipped overseas creating more jobs at home.

Now I understand that its good for business to expand and create jobs in other markets, which is exactly what the Heinz company did. Kerry has been accusing Bush of essentially encouraging the loss of jobs overseas when those very same corporate strategies are the same as the Heinz Corp.
No there not.
Have you been reading?

Sit down.


Currently, 60% of the sales of the H.J. Heinz Company are outside the United States and to accommodate those customers by providing facilities closer to those markets, the company maintains a number of overseas facilities that provide products for consumers in those markets.


Heinz&#39;s 50 companies have number-one or number-two brands in 200 countries, showcased by Heinz® Ketchup, the world&#39;s favorite ketchup.


H. J. Heinz Company today is an enterprise with over 110 major locations worldwide, with leading brands on six continents.

Someone&#39;s been reading pro-Bush websites and not interpreting the information for themslves. I figured this without even seeing the information. It&#39;s a damn food services company&#33;&#33;&#33;

Moving a factory to service customers in the same vicinity ain&#39;t outsourcing. It actually created a job.

Moving an IT job or call center that was here and now abroad IS outsourcing.

The job was MOVED.

I think a STFU is in order. <_<

(talk about the uninformed being allowed to vote, jeez, this is common sense)

[Biggles]

Originally posted by vidcc+10 August 2004 - 22:12--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 10 August 2004 - 22:12)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-vidcc@10 August 2004 - 15:17
my god there IS an echo in here :lol:&nbsp; :lol:&nbsp; :lol:
:D [/b][/quote]
:lol:

You beat me to it&#33;

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Biggles@10 August 2004 - 17:56
Out-sourcing is getting a little Thai girl to work 23 hours a day to make &#036;200 trainers (that used to be made in the US) specifically for the US market. The only difference being that she gets paid a &#036;1 a day.
Hank would have a major point if John&#39;s wife was named Teresa Nike Kerry. :lol: :lol:

Other than that the only similarity between Hank and j2 is the Republican party affiliation.

One of them actually makes good points, shows intelligence, etc.

[spinningfreemanny]

Soooo, back on topic; These swiftboat guys have released abook documenting these accusations with over 60 swiftboat guy quotes. I was listening to the guy who orchestrated this on Sean Hannity and he seems pretty confident; he was aggressive in calling senator kerry out.

[Biggles]

Originally posted by spinningfreemanny@10 August 2004 - 22:29
Soooo, back on topic; These swiftboat guys have released abook documenting these accusations with over 60 swiftboat guy quotes. I was listening to the guy who orchestrated this on Sean Hannity and he seems pretty confident; he was aggressive in calling senator kerry out.
I read yesterday that a number of the individuals had withdrawn their accusation. The waters are muddy. What is really happening over there?

[BigBank_Hank]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 16:31
Now I understand that its good for business to expand and create jobs in other markets, which is exactly what the Heinz company did. Kerry has been accusing Bush of essentially encouraging the loss of jobs overseas when those very same corporate strategies are the same as the Heinz Corp.
Shhhhh listen…. Opps you missed it Busyman my point just went right over your head.

Now you all have seemed to jump the gun a bit here as usual. I never said that she owned the company, which we’ve already been through. Secondly I never said that it was a bad thing to open business worldwide. What I was pointing out is how big of a hypocrite Kerry is. He’s complaing about how many jobs we loose over seas, which is just how his wife made her fortune.

Here’s a break down for all of you.

HERE (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1096992/posts)

[vidcc]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 16:35
What I was pointing out is how big of a hypocrite Kerry is. He’s complaing about how many jobs we loose over seas, which is just how his wife made her fortune.&nbsp;

Here’s a break down for all of you.

HERE (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1096992/posts)
And we are pointing out a difference between expanding worldwide and outsourcing..the difference is clear cut.
Americans have not and are not losing jobs in the heinz company due to outsourcing. Hienz hasn&#39;t closed any factories and moved them abroad then imported the product back here.



by the way didn&#39;t kerry&#39;s wife "inherit" the fortune rather than make it ?

Edit: if you go to the heinz website you can see that list without pointing to that right wing site.

[clocker]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 16:35

Shhhhh listen…. Opps you missed it Busyman my point just went right over your head.



Here’s a break down for all of you.

HERE (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1096992/posts)
Sorry, but your "point" ( such as it may be) didn&#39;t rise high enough to clear Herve Vallenchez&#39;s head.
Everyone has already acknowledged the fact that Heinz has overseas factories.

Probably not a huge call for the oyster sauce over here anyway.

Hank, I think you are making a big mistake concentrating on a food business anyway ( although I can see how the Kerry connection makes it fatally attractive to you).
Do you have any idea how much of our food comes from overseas?
America is not the "World&#39;s Breadbasket" anymore.
Labor costs and lucrative government subsidies have all but killed the farm business here.
We PAY folks NOT to grow things, we give huge amounts of cash to tobacco farmers ( while simultaneously spending huge amounts to curb tobacco use...go figure), we stockpile ( at the cost of millions annually) sugar that no one wants or needs ( but the sugar lobby is very influential)...the list goes on and on.
Do you have any idea where the seed for the lettuce on your Big Mac came from?
China.
(In fact, I believe that most of the tulips for which Holland is so famous are now grown there also.)

Your plaints about the Heinz Corp. are baseless and silly.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@10 August 2004 - 18:35
What I was pointing out is how big of a hypocrite Kerry is. He’s complaing about how many jobs we loose over seas, which is just how his wife made her fortune.

Here’s a break down for all of you.

HERE (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1096992/posts)
No Hank you are saying Kerry&#39;s a hypocrite because your right-wing website says it.

Use your own friggin&#39; brain for once in life&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

THE FUCKING JOBS OVERSEAS WERE CREATED NOT MOVED

PAY ATTENTION&#33;&#33;&#33;


By the way, Teresa Heinz Kerry is the CEO? :lol: :lol:

She seems like a person living off her family&#39;s fortune to me.
I could be wrong though.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Busyman@10 August 2004 - 17:21
Other than that the only similarity between Hank and j2 is the Republican party affiliation.

One of them actually makes good points, shows intelligence, etc.
This strikes me as quite small and churlish.

Strange days.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by j2k4+10 August 2004 - 21:01--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 10 August 2004 - 21:01)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@10 August 2004 - 17:21
Other than that the only similarity between Hank and j2 is the Republican party affiliation.

One of them actually makes good points, shows intelligence, etc.
This strikes me as quite small and churlish.
[/b][/quote]
Very well.

[Alex H]

Hank (like Bush), just because you say it doesn&#39;t make it true. Some people seem to think that if you repeat the same thing over and over makes it a fact...

Hank, do you hate Kerry or love Bush?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Alex H@10 August 2004 - 23:26
Hank (like Bush), just because you say it doesn&#39;t make it true. Some people seem to think that if you repeat the same thing over and over makes it a fact...

Hank, do you hate Kerry or love Bush?
Alex, do you love Kerry or hate Bush?

Hank&#39;s got a vote, too. :)

I&#39;ve pointed this out elsewhere, but I find it terribly ironic to hear someone attempt to argue, on principle, that Bush is a liar, and Kerry is not; that Bush is a flip-flopper, and Kerry is not; that Bush is a rich-boy and Kerry is not; that Bush is stupid, and Kerry is not (Bush apparently got better gradesthan Kerry at Yale :lol: ), then abandon principle altogether in order that they might say "ANYBODY BUT BUSH&#33;&#33;&#33;", because Kerry is so unpalatable as to not warrant a vote otherwise.

I find Bush&#39;s domestic policy to be just this side of abhorrent, his fiscal policies are much too liberal for my taste (tax-cuts aside)and he needs a few lessons in glibness, but I think he&#39;s doing as well as can be expected otherwise-to be blunt, to the extent Kerry has enumerated his plan vis a vis Iraq, etc., it pretty much mirrors Bush.

Funny little story in the L.A. Times (no fans of Bush, they) that all of our former allies (the ones Bush has so completely alienated) have stated that, if comes time for Kerry to line them up to help in the Mideast, etc., he can go suck eggs.

Hilarious. :lol:

[vidcc]

Originally posted by j2k4@11 August 2004 - 13:30
Funny little story in the L.A. Times (no fans of Bush, they) that all of our former allies (the ones Bush has so completely alienated) have stated that, if comes time for Kerry to line them up to help in the Mideast, etc., he can go suck eggs.

Hilarious. :lol:
Actually i can believe that because a person from another country generally doesn&#39;t look at the USA as being the president or the politicians and they see the actions of those representatives as the actions of americans. Just as we look at other countries in the same way.

Try not to take this as a comment about Bush but a comment on life in general...

One bad act can cancel out hundreds of good. It takes time to build respect and just a moment to lose it.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by vidcc@11 August 2004 - 14:42
[ Try not to take this as a comment about Bush but a comment on life in general...

One bad act can cancel out hundreds of good. It takes time to build respect and just a moment to lose it.
True enough; I think we all know that.

Anent Kerry: Even in light of the fact we aren&#39;t going to find out, I&#39;d love to have witnessed Kerry&#39;s "sensitive" war.

That would have been a hoot.

[Alex H]

j2 - I am not saying Kerry is a wonderboy.

I do think it says something about a candidate to see how their campeigns are run - Kerry is trying to sell something new, Bush is trying to make sure people don&#39;t buy it. Kerry takes a swing at Bush and suggests an alternative (maybe not a great one, but his unique idea of asking the UN for help in Iraq isn&#39;t a bad one). Bush on the other hand is only interested in attacking Kerry and repeating "The United States is now a safer place".

Take the two candidates&#39; service records - when Bush&#39;s National Guard service came into question, the Democrats and the left-leaning public said "Please explain." What did we get? Stonewalling, followed by a troupe of right-wingers with their slings full of mud and their sights on Kerry.

[j2k4]

QUOTE: AlexH:

I do think it says something about a candidate to see how their campeigns are run - Kerry is trying to sell something new,(New? What&#39;s "New" about it? What IS IT, exactly? Kinda hard to tell, so far.) Bush is trying to make sure people don&#39;t buy it. (I think that&#39;s called an "ELECTION CAMPAIGN") Kerry takes a swing at Bush and suggests an alternative (maybe not a great one, but his unique idea of asking the UN for help in Iraq isn&#39;t a bad one) (Neither is it a NEW one). Bush on the other hand is only interested in attacking Kerry and repeating "The United States is now a safer place".("Safer" is a relative term; this would not change under Kerry, even [and especially] if he "cuts and runs".)

Take the two candidates&#39; service records - when Bush&#39;s National Guard service came into question, the Democrats and the left-leaning public said "Please explain." What did we get? Stonewalling, followed by a troupe of right-wingers with their slings full of mud and their sights on Kerry. (I&#39;m sure they&#39;d stash their slings, mud and sights if Mr. Kerry would "explain" a few things about his service, Alex.)

BTW-I heard today the U.N. voted to continue it&#39;s "mission" in Iraq, as if they&#39;ve been there all along.

What is there to continue?

They ran away when they got bombed, and haven&#39;t been back.

Who will protect them if they return?

The U.N. should, as Busyman is fond of saying, STFU. ;)

[Alex H]

As the whole contest is between Bush and Kerry, my comments are to be taken in context of their previous political history.

Kerry is trying to sell something new, i.e. "It" is the presidential candidates and Bush is the "old" one and Kerry is the "new" one. My point was that there is not enough positive campaigning.

The comment about UN involvement in Iraq was tounge-in-cheek - It is not a new idea, but it didn&#39;t seem to occour to Bush and maybe the American public have a short attention span and can&#39;t remember what life was like when the US played an active role in the UN.

I know safe is a relative term, and you know it. Bush on the other hand is quite happy to keep repeating it in the hope that it will become true, in the same way that he denies making mistakes and make his presidency look less disasterous than it really is.

Kerry&#39;s service record comes after Bush&#39;s - Bush is President and should explain himself. People who come along later should be measured against him, but as he is not inclined to talk about his time in the National Guard I don&#39;t see why Kerry is suddenly the bad guy by doing the same thing as Bush.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Alex H@12 August 2004 - 21:22
Kerry&#39;s service record comes after Bush&#39;s - Bush is President and should explain himself. People who come along later should be measured against him, but as he is not inclined to talk about his time in the National Guard I don&#39;t see why Kerry is suddenly the bad guy by doing the same thing as Bush.
Utter bullshit.

Kerry is the one who opened the whole can-of-worms by introducing himself continually as "John Kerry-War Hero".

He put himself in front.

As to the rest of your post, context, as with safety, is a relative thing; it is, after all, an election season. ;)

[Alex H]

Correct me if I am wrong but didn&#39;t Bush take America to war before Kerry went into the running for President? Bush was happy to describe himself as a war President and he too exploited his service record with stunts like the "Mission Accomplished" jet landing (record? HA&#33; What record? Didn&#39;t they get lost somewhere?)

Bush made defence an election priority, and Kerry trumped him by having more experience. Sorry.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Alex H@13 August 2004 - 02:05
Correct me if I am wrong but didn&#39;t Bush take America to war before Kerry went into the running for President? Bush was happy to describe himself as a war President and he too exploited his service record with stunts like the "Mission Accomplished" jet landing (record? HA&#33; What record? Didn&#39;t they get lost somewhere?)

Bush made defence an election priority, and Kerry trumped him by having more experience. Sorry.
By use of such stilted reasoning, you might trace the "militarism" (as opposed to service records, which is silly; such things haven&#39;t concerned the Dems for several decades until now) right to 9/11, Alex, and unless you&#39;re pushing the idea that Bush staged that as a re-election ploy...






Are you sure you want to take this to it&#39;s logical conclusion? :huh: