TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Kerry the Dolphin Part 2
Pages (5): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »

Most of the stuff you have yanked off of other websites that clearly have an agenda directed at John Kerry astounds me because if you dig deep enough you can find the dirt on someone. In classic Republican style as though the Bill Clinton outcome didn't teach them a good and proper lesson they continue on the path of trying to label their opposition instead of operating from their position of strength since they don't have one. Instead they possess an ideological, war and terror driven administration that believes America is a safer place by isolating others and pursuing a policy of we know what's best for the world attitude.

Ironically here is what I find to be so interesting however about your articles, many of Kerry's positions(I use the term lightly based on the articles presented) are dated before 9/11 vis a vis post 9/11 yet Republicans love to highlight how the world is a different place since September 11th so why wouldn't John Kerry's positions be a reflection of those changes as well, answer this question for me please and take your time instead of searching for articles that have a clear focus on not realizing that politics isn't about being stagnant in one's ideals to your detriment or the nation's, hint hint about the current President. You call Kerry a war mongol and Bush is ? I wouldn't blame you for not being able to offer a credible defense of this administration, I pity the individual who would attempt such a task.

If Bush was doing such a good job of making America better then why are so many of his ads and campaign speeches not focused on tangible outcomes of his administrations tenure in power, instead like you he has to deliver flip-flop, fearmongering texts. Accentuate your positives over your opponent is a sure way to demonstrate your strength in politics, usually You don't even try to on behalf of Bush and you are a Bush supporter, okay.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Most of the stuff you have yanked off of other websites that clearly have an agenda directed at John Kerry astounds me because if you dig deep enough you can find the dirt on someone. In classic Republican style as though the Bill Clinton outcome didn't teach them a good and proper lesson they continue on the path of trying to label their opposition instead of operating from their position of strength since they don't have one. Instead they possess an ideological, war and terror driven administration that believes America is a safer place by isolating others and pursuing a policy of we know what's best for the world attitude. Ironically here is what I find to be so interesting however about your articles, many of Kerry's positions(I use the term lightly based on the articles presented) are dated before 9/11 vis a vis post 9/11 yet Republicans love to highlight how the world is a different place since September 11th so why wouldn't John Kerry's positions be a reflection of those changes as well, answer this question for me please and take your time instead of searching for articles that have a clear focus on not realizing that politics isn't about being stagnant in one's ideals to your detriment or the nation's, hint hint about the current President. You call Kerry a war mongol and Bush is ? I wouldn't blame you for not being able to offer a credible defense of this administration, I pity the individual who would attempt such a task. If Bush was doing such a good job of making America better then why are so many of his ads and campaign speeches not focused on tangible outcomes of his administrations tenure in power, instead like you he has to deliver flip-flop, fearmongering texts. Accentuate your positives over your opponent is a sure way to demonstrate your strength in politics, usually You don't even try to on behalf of Bush and you are a Bush supporter, okay.

Once again you tend to show your partisan side and highlight the other side which is the only argument you can come up with. I have yet to see anything nice spill onto any of your posts about Mr.Kerry regarding accomplishments of his senate duty or vietnam or anything else.

Most of your posts have been liberal whinings about the "disastrous" adminstration in control right now which I completely respect because your a liberal and you see things differently.

Let me explain to you a little about partisanship.
Republicans will view Iraq's scenario as an accomplishment.
Democrats will view Iraq's situation as a disaster.

Fact of the matter is I see Saddam put away as the best thing ever happening in that region.
I could tell you I have talked to several friends who are stationed in Iraq and they will tell anyone the situation over there is completely the opposite as to what your are saying or any liberal. For instance most people are joyous that they have been liberated from the dictator of Saddam.
You would say otherwise because of your findings in CNN and the footage that comes out on tv or just news item about casualties.
You could call me a liar but do i care? Of course not.
They asked Kerry if Bush is a liar? He said thats too strong of a word and refrained from using it. Why? who knows.
Iraq to me has been a great success at the end of the day.
could of it been handled better? Of course , all wars are never pretty and could be commanded to a much more efficient extent.
Iraq to you has been a disaster..what do i say? I respect your opinion and really could care less.

But let me highlight one more thing about your little dribble.

quote:

I wouldn't blame you for not being able to offer a credible defense of this administration, I pity the individual who would attempt such a task.

pity? for showing support and feeling different towards a particular situation? Do you even think before you type?
I totally lost respect for you with that comment. And as other people from this forum have mentioned before about your radical comments. You have sunk to new lows with pitying the individual who would stand by their party and defend it and you feel indifferent towards that defense.
Wow...such ignorance and blindness.

quote:

Originally posted by speedracer_mec Once again you tend to show your partisan side and highlight the other side which is the only argument you can come up with. I have yet to see anything nice spill onto any of your posts about Mr.Kerry regarding accomplishments of his senate duty or vietnam or anything else. Most of your posts have been liberal whinings about the "disastrous" adminstration in control right now which I completely respect because your a liberal and you see things differently. Let explain to you a little about partisanship. Republicans will view Iraq's scenario as an accomplishment. Democrats will view Iraq's situation as a disaster. Fact of the matter is I see Saddam put away as the best thing ever happening in that region. I could tell you I have talked to several friends who are stationed in Iraq and they will tell anyone the situation over there is completely the opposite as to what your are saying or any liberal. For instance most people are joyous that they have been liberated from the dictator of Saddam. You would say otherwise because of your findings in CNN and the footage that comes out on tv or just news item about casualties. You could call me a liar but do i care? Of course not. They asked Kerry if Bush is a liar? He said thats too strong of a word and refrained from using it. Why? who knows. Iraq to me has been a great success at the end of the day. could of it been handled better? Of course , all wars are never pretty and could be commanded to a much more efficient extent. Iraq to you has been a disaster..what do i say? I respect your opinion and really could care less. But let me highlight one more thing about your little dribble. pity? for showing support and feeling different towards a particular situation? Do you even think before you type? I totally lost respect for you with that comment. And as other people from this forum have mentioned before about your radical comments. You have sunk to new lows with pitying the individual who would stand by their party and defend it and you feel indifferent towards that defense. Wow...such ignorance and blindness.

You term John Kerry a war mongol his wife a lunatic and you try to act as though you have not engaged in the same name callings and dumb down posts, look up the term sanctamonious please.

And I am the melodramatic, Dude double check your posts please Iraq has been a great success, you have lost respect for me yet you put forth this statement "I respect your opinion and really could care less" somehow I doubt I ever had your respect and didn't ask for it so you can spare me the real melodrama about your respect. Your comments have been no less radical about John Kerry than mine's about George Bush. You speak from both sides of your mouth and then term John Kerry the flip-flopper. You make it sound as though you are a beacon of bipartisan thoughts, yet Iraq is a great success, I would laugh if it wasn't so sad, who is truly ignorant and blind to the reality of what is occuring in Iraq.

Maybe you should read some other news sources(International) to gain a better understanding of what is occuring on the ground since Fox isn't enough for you. How insulting that you assume I watch only CNN and liberal media I'm so offended, well not really because I have mentioned all the places I get my news from maybe I can enlighten you on some, too bad they are in other languages as well.

If you are offended that I pity your lack of defense of Bush then demonstrate his strengths please. This is a political forum and just because I pity something doesn't make me the be all that ends all, I welcome rebuttals and look forward to yours.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan And I am the melodramatic, Dude double check your posts please Iraq has been a great success, you have lost respect for me yet you put forth this statement "I respect your opinion and really could care less" somehow I doubt I ever had your respect

quote:

i respect your opinion

I respect your different views and where you are coming from.
I wont engage in a mudslinging contest

quote:

i really could care less

The way you feel about this subject really has no profound impact on me personally and won't change the way I feel....even if you "pity" us.

quote:

beacon of bi-partisan

me, this? oh come on..thats ridiculous.

I do not watch Fox news network.
I enjoy watching CNN.
You assuming I watch Fox news further implies your ridiculous assumptions on us conservatives.

I guess you should pity us. Your such an amazing guy


You ask of me to highlight a success of Bush's adminstration and I gave it to you. You obviously disagree and we will continue to walk in circles on this issue. I asked you to state some of kerry's accomplishments as well...but you asked me once again to state some of Bush's accomplishments. I stated his Iraq success but unless you are down there in the trenchs you really can't speak. I told you about some people in there right now. I guess you overlooked it and came straight to attack the rebuttal on your "pity" comment.

quote:

Originally posted by speedracer_mec I respect your different views and where you are coming from. I wont engage in a mudslinging contest I do not watch Fox news network. I enjoy watching CNN. You assuming I watch Fox news further implies your ridiculous assumptions on us conservatives. I guess you should pity us. Your such an amazing guy

You assumed that I watched CNN so what's your point, another ridiculous assumption about us liberals. I suppose we shall agree to disagree, not respectfully however

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan You assumed that I watched CNN so what's your point, another ridiculous assumption about us liberals. I suppose we shall agree to disagree, not respectfully however

We'll leave it at that

Ill wait for occ's long ass reply tomorrow, that I feel breathing down my neck.


Now i will go play WARCRAFT3 frozen throne.

seeya

Funny thing is I wasn't even a liberal, Bush managed to turn me into one. When I arrived at the TA Politics forum in my infancy I was a defender of him, preaching the rhetoric of objectivity and good intentions, as many on here can point out, boy has that changed The reason I emphasize Iraq is because that is what changed my view of the administration, based on the after events of the war, which we are all keenly aware of by now.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Funny thing is I wasn't even a liberal, Bush managed to turn me into one. When I arrived at the TA Politics forum in my infancy I was a defender of him, preaching the rhetoric of objectivity and good intentions, as many on here can point out, boy has that changed The reason I emphasize Iraq is because that is what changed my view of the administration, based on the after events of the war, which we are all keenly aware of by now.

you've said that numerous times...

quote:

Originally posted by speedracer_mec you've said that numerous times...

I was directing that directly to you should you believe that I was Che Guevara or something of that elk. I gave the Bush administration a full opportunity of fairness and support in the past, I doubt you could ever do that with John Kerry based on your own commentaries in this forum, think about it. You might have missed the purpose of that commentary, not all "liberals" are born that way, actions on the part of government tends to influence positions just a little.

We both in live in different circumstances.
The Gop has always appealed to my family and I.
So you can not compare you and I.

First, a dumbass in a spacesuit. Then, the picture with the Marines who hated him. Now this. Kerry sure has a knack for f'ing up his photo op...along with his wife.

quote:

Originally posted by imokruok First, a dumbass in a spacesuit. Then, the picture with the Marines who hated him. Now this. Kerry sure has a knack for f'ing up his photo op...along with his wife.

Oh I don't know, I can handle cute little Drudge Report photos (some he has deliberately doctored, mind you) of Kerry every now and then.

What I can't stand are photos like this:



You know, the hypocritical, deliberate photo-op, "Mission Accomplished" (well, not really is it George?) bullshit kind.

But hey, each to his own.

And sorry you don't like his wife. It must suck for you conservatives to have a woman who doesn't look and sound like a fucking Stepford wife about to become the 1st lady.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 It must suck for you conservatives to have a woman who doesn't look and sound like a fucking Stepford wife about to become the 1st lady.

You have a problem with the Stepford wives? Oh man, that hit me where it hurts.

LOL I will admit Bush has some ridiculous pictures.
Crack me up all the time
Ill post some kerry ones and Bush ones





But just to be even on both sides

Check out some of Bush's ridiculous ones.lol

Oooo, just found some great pictures here:

http://billionairesforbush.com

hahahaha, awsome pics guys, esp from you opus

"leave no billionare behind!"

Sorry it's taken me so long to respond, work has gone into overdrive this week. Anyway:

quote:

Originally posted by speedracer_mec Key Word "this regard" Nice choice of words because I agree with you. But the fact of the matter is that we are only highlighting one sentence from the video and his overall duty in the senate. You've boiled the video down to one statement. The video clearly shows Kerry making pro going to war statements repeatedly then he gradually changes his stand and makes claim that he was anti war from the get-go John Kerry supported the war, until he realized that he had little chance of winning the nomination if he didn't court anti-war pacifists. For example: I listened to his statements in the video and here are some indirect quotes. explain Kerry's refrences to Saddam Hussein as 'dangerous....a threat to the United States...' as far back as 1995. I recall Kerry claiming that Iraq '...posed a serious threat to national security...,' and went as far as saying that a'... preemptive strike may be neccessary...' (not direct quotes)

Stating that Iraq posed a serious threat to national security and stating that a pre-emptive strike may be necessary is not antithetical towards opposing an invasion as implemented by the Bush administration. For example, using N. Korea as a case study, one can most certainly make the case that they are a threat, they may require a pre-emptive invasion, however, actually carrying out an invasion in the present set of circumstances would be sheer folly.

quote:

Also, please explain why John Kerry said that 'Russia, France and Germany lacked a backbone when dealing with Iraq....and this would only seek to hurt to coalition agaist Iraq...' (not direct quotes)

Because Russia, France, and Germany have a strong business ties to Iraq which may cloud their resolve towards applying pressure on Iraq. Once again, one can be critical of Russian, French, and German policy in Iraq vis-a-vis the United Nations without fully supporting a pre-emptive strike at the time the Bush administration began the attack. I was critical of the UN for not being as forceful since the fall of 2002, that doesn't mean that I'm a hypocrit for being against the invasion in March of 2003.

quote:

Lets examine John Kerry's position on numerous issues. Some he has stood by them but the fact is he has jumped around like a madman. Lets begin. Issue:Kerry's Stance on Numerous Issues quote: Welfare Reform Before: In 1988, Sen. Kerry voted against a proposal to require at least one parent in any two-parent welfare family to work a mere 16 hours a week, declaring the work requirement "troublesome to me." Revised Position: During his 1996 re-election campaign, when his Republican challenger, Gov. William Weld, was calling him soft on welfare, Kerry voted for the much stricter welfare reform law that Clinton signed into law Mandatory Minimums Before: In 1993 and 1994, the senator from liberal Massachusetts voted against mandatory minimum sentences for gang activity, gun crimes, drug trafficking, and drug sales to minors, explaining in an impassioned speech that long sentences for some dealers who sell to minors would be "enormous injustices" and that some convicted drug offenders were "so barely culpable it is sad." He also said congressionally imposed mandatory minimums made no sense and would just create turf battles between federal and local prosecutors. Revised Position: Today, presidential candidate Kerry strongly supports mandatory minimum sentences for federal crimes, including the sale of drugs to minors. Affirmative Action Before: In 1992, Kerry created a huge stir among liberals and civil rights groups with a major policy address arguing that affirmative action has "kept America thinking in racial terms" and helped promote a "culture of dependency." Revised position: Today, Kerry's campaign Web site vows to "Preserve Affirmative Action," noting that he "consistently opposed efforts in the Senate to undermine or eliminate affirmative action programs, and supports programs that seeks to enhance diversity." It doesn't mention any downside. Death Penalty Before: During one of his debates with Weld in 1996, Kerry ridiculed the idea of capital punishment for terrorists as a "terrorist protection policy," predicting that it would just discourage other nations from extraditing captured terrorists to the United States. After: Kerry still opposes capital punishment, but he now makes an exception for terrorists. Education Reform Before: In a 1998 policy speech the Boston Globe described as "a dramatic break from Democratic dogma," Kerry challenged teachers unions by proposing to gut their tenure and seniority systems, giving principals far more power to hire and fire unqualified or unmotivated teachers Revised Position: Today, Kerry once again espouses pure Democratic dogma on education. His Web site pledges to "stop blaming and start supporting public school educators," vowing to give them "better training and better pay, with more career opportunities, more empowerment and more mentors." It doesn't mention seniority or tenure. Double Taxation Before: In December 2002, Kerry broke with Democratic dogma yet again in a Cleveland speech, calling for the abolition of the unfair "double taxation" of stock dividends in order to promote more investment and more accurate valuations of companies. After: Five weeks later, after President Bush proposed a second round of tax cuts that included an end to this double taxation, Kerry changed his tune. He voted against the dividend tax cuts that were ultimately enacted by Congress and now hopes to roll them back as president, along with Bush's other tax cuts for upper-income Americans. Gas Taxation Before: In 1994, when the Concord Coalition gave Kerry a failing rating for his deficit reduction votes, he complained that he should have gotten credit for supporting a 50-cent increase in the gas tax. After: Today he no longer supports any increase in the gas tax Can u say Political Gain? Social Security Before: During the 1996 campaign, when I was a Globe reporter, Kerry told me the Social Security system should be overhauled. He said Congress should consider raising the retirement age and means-testing benefits and called it "wacky" that payroll taxes did not apply to income over $62,700. "I know it's all going to be unpopular," he said. "But this program has serious problems, and we have a generational responsibility to fix them." After: Kerry no longer wants to mess with Social Security. "John Kerry will never balance the budget on the backs of America's seniors," his Web site promises. Trade Before: Kerry has been a consistent supporter of free trade deals, and as late as December, when reporters asked if there was any issue on which he was prepared to disagree with Democratic interest groups, Kerry replied: "Trade." Slate editor Jacob Weisberg came away impressed by the depth of Kerry's commitment to the issue: "Unlike Edwards, he supports international trade agreements without qualification." Revised Position: But that was three months ago! In recent weeks, when Kerry has talked trade, he has talked nothing but qualification, calling for "fair trade" rather than "free trade," claiming to agree completely with the protectionist Edwards on trade issues, and vowing to "put teeth" into environmental and labor restrictions in agreements like NAFTA.

I'm not going to go into every single issue you've outlined above (some seem stolen from Club for Growth PAC ad and some of the other points are blatantly incorrect), however, I can look at a few to make my point.

Death Penalty for Terrorists:

Yes it's true that Kerry voted against bill 1798 to impose the death penalty for the "terrorist murder of United States nationals abroad." Take note of the legistlative wording to emphasize crimes committed abroad. It is indeed significant because as Kerry stated in the Boston Globe, "Your policy (the death penalty) would amount to a terrorist protection policy. Mine would put them in jail."

Since then he has reversed his opinion however, that reversal of opinion was not due to changed public opinion, it was due to a change in facts. When speaking to the Boston Globe in 2002, he stated that countries would be more willing to turn over terrorists in the aftermath of 9/11 and that, "I think 9/11 has changed the capacity for extradition." Therefore you can try to blow smoke up people's asses by removing all context, but please, recognize common sense when you see it.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=226

Gas Tax

Well duh ... of course he doesn't support a gas tax now as opposed to 10 years ago. This one also falls into the common sense category. That's like calling Republican fiscal conservaticism during the booming 90's hypocritical with the Bush administration's blatant deficit spending for the purposes of stimulating the economy.

Welfare Reform

Ahhh typical contextual witholding. Amendment 1511 focused solely on the eligibility "workfare" requirement of forcing parents to work a set amount of hours a week.

What Kerry voted on in 96 was a broader overhaul of welfare as a whole. In this bill there were greater child protections, and the nature of eliminating the "entitlement" status of welfare was changed to require parents to work (note: no minimum hours in a week) after 2 years with a total cap of benefits to cease in 5 year's time. THere are quite a number of additional provisions as well. Please demonstrate how this comprehensive bill is exactly the same as the amendment introduced in 1988 and then we can discuss flip-flopping.

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_ca...ssues&year=1996

Those are the issues I'll address off the top of my head, but I'm certain you can comprehend that details are critical in forming an educated opinion. However, if you would like, I can dig into the meat and bones of every issue you've outlined above ... so long as you similarly dig into every example of Bush's purported flip-flopping over the years:

quote:

1. Social Security Surplus BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS... "We're going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus." [President Bush, 3/3/01] ...BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS The New York Times reported that "the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes." [The New York Times, 2/6/02] 2. Patient's Right to Sue GOVERNOR BUSH VETOES PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "Despite his campaign rhetoric in favor of a patients' bill of rights, Bush fought such a bill tooth and nail as Texas governor, vetoing a bill coauthored by Republican state Rep. John Smithee in 1995. He... constantly opposed a patient's right to sue an HMO over coverage denied that resulted in adverse health effects." [Salon, 2/7/01] ...CANDIDATE BUSH PRAISES TEXAS PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "We're one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage... It's time for our nation to come together and do what's right for the people. And I think this is right for the people. You know, I support a national patients' bill of rights, Mr. Vice President. And I want all people covered. I don't want the law to supersede good law like we've got in Texas." [Governor Bush, 10/17/00] ...PRESIDENT BUSH'S ADMINISTRATION ARGUES AGAINST RIGHT TO SUE "To let two Texas consumers, Juan Davila and Ruby R. Calad, sue their managed-care companies for wrongful denials of medical benefits �would be to completely undermine' federal law regulating employee benefits, Assistant Solicitor General James A. Feldman said at oral argument March 23. Moreover, the administration's brief attacked the policy rationale for Texas's law, which is similar to statutes on the books in nine other states." [Washington Post, 4/5/04] 3. Tobacco Buyout BUSH SUPPORTS CURRENT TOBACCO FARMERS' QUOTA SYSTEM... "They've got the quota system in place -- the allotment system -- and I don't think that needs to be changed." [President Bush, 5/04] ...BUSH ADMINISTRATION WILL SUPPORT FEDERAL BUYOUT OF TOBACCO QUOTAS "The administration is open to a buyout." [White House spokeswoman Jeanie Mamo, 6/18/04] 4. North Korea BUSH WILL NOT OFFER NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM... "We developed a bold approach under which, if the North addressed our long-standing concerns, the United States was prepared to take important steps that would have significantly improved the lives of the North Korean people. Now that North Korea's covert nuclear weapons program has come to light, we are unable to pursue this approach." [President's Statement, 11/15/02] ...BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFERS NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM"Well, we will work to take steps to ease their political and economic isolation. So there would be -- what you would see would be some provisional or temporary proposals that would only lead to lasting benefit after North Korea dismantles its nuclear programs. So there would be some provisional or temporary efforts of that nature." [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 6/23/04] 5. Abortion BUSH SUPPORTS A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE... "Bush said he...favors leaving up to a woman and her doctor the abortion question." [The Nation, 6/15/00, quoting the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, 5/78] ...BUSH OPPOSES A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE "I am pro-life." [Governor Bush, 10/3/00] 6. OPEC BUSH PROMISES TO FORCE OPEC TO LOWER PRICES... "What I think the president ought to do [when gas prices spike] is he ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say we expect you to open your spigots...And the president of the United States must jawbone OPEC members to lower the price." [President Bush, 1/26/00] ...BUSH REFUSES TO LOBBY OPEC LEADERS With gas prices soaring in the United States at the beginning of 2004, the Miami Herald reported the president refused to "personally lobby oil cartel leaders to change their minds." [Miami Herald, 4/1/04] 7. Iraq Funding BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004... "We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton, 2/2/04] ...BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 "I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops." [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04] 8. Condoleeza Rice Testimony BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'... "Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference." [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04] ...BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: "Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony." [President Bush, 3/30/04] 9. Science BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00] ...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists�including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents�issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04] 10. Ahmed Chalabi BUSH INVITES CHALABI TO STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS...President Bush also met with Chalabi during his brief trip to Iraq last Thanksgiving [White House Documents 1/20/04, 11/27/03] ...BUSH MILITARY ASSISTS IN RAID OF CHALABI'S HOUSE "U.S. soldiers raided the home of America's one-time ally Ahmad Chalabi on Thursday and seized documents and computers." [Washington Post, 5/20/04] 11. Department of Homeland Security BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02] ...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02] 12. Weapons of Mass Destruction BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories...for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03] ...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons.And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04] 13. Free Trade BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02] ...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03] 14. Osama Bin Laden BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01] ...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA "I don't know where he is.You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him."[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02] 15. The Environment BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to...establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00] ...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03] 16. WMD Commission BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04] ...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE "Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04] 17. Creation of the 9/11 Commission BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02] ...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02] 18. Time Extension for 9/11 Commission BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04] ...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04] 19. One Hour Limit for 9/11 Commission Testimony BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday." [NY Times, 2/26/04] ...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04] 20. Gay Marriage BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00] ...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04] 21. Nation Building BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00] ...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03] 22. Saddam/al Qaeda Link BUSH SAYS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM... "You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." [President Bush, 9/25/02] ...BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11." [President Bush, 9/17/03] 23. U.N. Resolution BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03] ...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03] 24. Involvement in the Palestinian Conflict BUSH OPPOSES SUMMITS... "Well, we've tried summits in the past, as you may remember. It wasn't all that long ago where a summit was called and nothing happened, and as a result we had significant intifada in the area." [President Bush, 04/05/02] ...BUSH SUPPORTS SUMMITS "If a meeting advances progress toward two states living side by side in peace, I will strongly consider such a meeting. I'm committed to working toward peace in the Middle East." [President Bush, 5/23/03] 25. Campaign Finance BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000] ...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]

Hmmmm what else ... oh yea (sorry if there's overlap):

quote:

1. Bush Flip-Flops on Independent 9/11 Commission Bush Flip: Initially Opposed to Independent 9/11 Commission Bush opposed an independent inquiry into 9/11, arguing it would duplicate a probe conducted by Congress. In July 2002, his administration issued a "statement of policy" that read "...the Administration would oppose an amendment that would create a new commission to conduct a similar review [to Congress's investigation]." [Statement of Administration Policy, Executive Office of the President, 7/24/02; LA Times, 11/28/02] Bush Flop: Bush Relented and Appointed Independent Commission President Bush finally agreed to support an independent investigation into the 9/11 attacks after "the congressional committees unearthed more and more examples of intelligence lapses, the administration reversed its stance." [Los Angeles Times, 11/28/02] 2. Bush Flip-Flops on Independent WMD Commission Bush Flip: Refuses to Call for Independent Bipartisan Commission on Weapons of Mass Destruction "President Bush said on January 30, 2004, 'I want to know the facts' about any intelligence failures concerning Saddam Hussein's alleged cache of forbidden weapons but he declined to endorse calls for an independent investigation." [AP, 1/30/04] Bush Flop: Bush Appoints WMD Investigation Commission President Bush named a nine-member bipartisan commission to investigate U.S. intelligence-gathering capabilities in February 2004. The AP noted, "Bush had initially opposed a commission, but agreed to do so as calls grew from Republican lawmakers as well as Democrats." The Los Angeles Times reported, "The White House opposed that panel initially, then backed down under pressure, and some say administration officials now regret doing so because the administration has become locked in a series of embarrassing battles with the Sept. 11 commission." The New York Times noted Bush "gave the panel until March 2005, well after the November elections, to submit its conclusions." [NY Times, 2/7/04; LA Times, 2/1/04; AP, 2/6/04] 3. Bush Flip-Flops on Time He'll Spend With 9/11 Commission Bush Flip: Would Meet For Only One Hour With 9/11 Commission McClellan: Obviously, as part of this, the President will be meeting with the chairman and vice chairman at some point in the near future. We are still working on the exact time of that meeting. We have discussed with the commission what we believe is a reasonable period of time to provide the chairman and vice chairman with answers to all of their questions. Q: Is that the one-hour time frame? McClellan: That's what I'm referring to. [WH Press Briefing, 3/9/04] Bush Flop: White House Says No Time Limit on President's Testimony "President George W. Bush will privately answer all questions raised by the federal commission investigating the September 11 attacks, the White House said, suggesting that Bush might allow the interview to extend beyond the one-hour limit originally offered to the panel by the White House. 'He's going to answer all the questions they want to raise,' said the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, whose remarks suggested that the White House was softening its negotiating stance toward the bipartisan commission. 'Nobody's watching the clock.'" [WH Press Briefing, 3/9/04; International Herald Tribune, 3/11/04] 4. Bush Flip-Flops On Calling For A U.N. Vote On Iraq War Bush Flip: U.S. Will Seek U.N. Vote For War With Iraq Bush: ...yes, we'll call for a vote. Question: No matter what? Bush: No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam. [Bush News Conference, 3/6/03, emphasis added] Bush Flop: Bush Attacked Iraq Without U.N. Vote Bush "failed to win explicit [security] council approval for the use of force" in Iraq. Two days before bombs began to fall in Iraq, the Bush administration withdrew its resolution from the UN Security Council that would have authorized military force. Bush abandoned his call for a vote after it became clear that the US could muster only four votes in support of force. [Washington Post, 3/21/03; Los Angeles Times, 3/18/03] 5. Bush Flip-Flops on Department Of Homeland Security Bush Flip: Bush Thought Homeland Security Cabinet Position Was "Just Not Necessary" In October 2001, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said Bush opposed creating Office of Homeland Security position for Ridge. "[T]he president has suggested to members of Congress that they do not need to make this a statutory post, that he [Ridge] does not need Cabinet rank, for example, there does not need to be a Cabinet-level Office of Homeland Security is because there is such overlap among the various agencies, because every agency of the government has security concerns," Fleischer said. [White House Press Briefing, 10/24/01] Bush Flop: Bush Decides to Support Homeland Security The New York Times reported, "Bush initially resisted Democratic proposals for a Cabinet-level agency. But once he endorsed it, the president pushed Congress for fast action as it debated such issues as whistle-blower protections, concerns over civil liberties and collective bargaining for department employees." In remarks to Homeland Security Department employees, Bush claimed credit for supporting the Department: "In just 12 months, under the leadership of your President...you faced the challenges standing up this new Department and you get a -- and a gold star for a job well done." [New York Times, 2/28/03; Bush Remarks at One-Year Anniversary of DHS, 3/2/04] 6. Bush Flip-Flops on Gay Marriage Bush Flip: It's Up to the States to Decide In a 2000 presidential primary debate, candidate George W. Bush said gay marriage was a state's issue, saying, "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Presidential Primary Debate, 2/15/00] Bush Flop: Bush Supports Constitutional Amendment That Restricts States' Rights Bush: "If we are to prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever, our nation must enact a constitutional amendment to protect marriage in America. Decisive and democratic action is needed, because attempts to redefine marriage in a single state or city could have serious consequences throughout the country." [Bush, 2/24/04] 7. Bush Flip-Flops on Using Military For Nation Building Bush Flip: Bush Promised Not to Use Military for Nation Building In a campaign rally in Tennessee, then-Presidential candidate Bush criticized the Clinton administration for using the military in nation-building missions. Bush said, "I'm worried about an opponent who uses nation-building and the military in the same sentence. See, our view of the military is for our military to be properly prepared to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place." [Governor George W. Bush, 11/6/00] Bush Flop: President Used Military for Nation Building in Afghanistan and Iraq After the removal of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Bush met with soldiers stationed in Afghanistan at the White House and thanked them for their nation building efforts. A senior administration official said, "The administration, with its international partners, is doing something akin to nation-building." The plans for a post war Iraq also included nation building measures and, according to the Baltimore Sun, "Secretary of State Colin L. Powell confirmed...that Bush was considering, among other options, installing a U.S.-led occupation government if Hussein's regime is removed." [Baltimore Sun, 10/19/02] 8. Bush Flip-Flops on Hybrid Automobiles Bush Flip: Bush Mocked Gore's Tax Credit for Hybrid Cars "'How many of you own hybrid electric gasoline engine vehicles? If you look under there, you'll see that's one of the criteria necessary to receive tax relief. So when he talks about targeted tax relief that's pretty darn targeted,' Bush told the Arlington Heights rally, drawing laughs." [Chicago Sun-Times, 10/29/00] Bush Flop: Bush Supported Investing in Hybrid Cars In his State of the Union speech, Bush said, "Tonight I am proposing $1.2 billion in research funding so that America can lead the world in developing clean, hydrogen-powered automobiles. ... Join me in this important innovation, to make our air significantly cleaner, and our country much less dependent on foreign sources of energy." [White House, "President Delivers 'State of the Union,'" 1/28/03] 9. Bush Flip-Flops on Assault Weapons Ban Bush Flip: Bush Supports Extending Assault Weapons Ban Ashcroft: "It is my understanding that the president-elect of the United States has indicated his clear support for extending the assault weapons ban, and I will be pleased to move forward with that position." [Confirmation Hearing, Senate Judiciary Committee, 1/17/01] Bush Flop: Bush Opposes Extension of Assault Weapons Ban "The White House is opposing addition of gun show and assault weapons restrictions to a bill shielding firearms makers and dealers from lawsuits, prompting angry complaints from Democrats that President Bush is reneging on earlier support for the two proposals...In a statement [on February 24, 2004], the White House urged passage of the lawsuits measure without amendments that might delay its enactment. 'Any amendment that would delay enactment of the bill beyond this year is unacceptable,' the statement said. Democrats interpreted this as an effort to undermine support for the gun-control measures. 'For the president to say he is for the assault weapons ban but then act against it is a flip-flop if there ever was one,' said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), one of several sponsors of the assault weapons proposal in the Senate." [Washington Post, 2/26/04] 10. Bush Flip-Flops on Steel Tariffs Bush Flip: Bush Imposes Steel Tariffs "President Bush on [March 5, 2002] slapped punishing tariffs of 8% to 30% on several types of imported steel in an effort to help the ailing U.S. industry, drawing criticism from American allies and mixed reviews at home. 'An integral part of our commitment to free trade is our commitment to enforcing trade laws to make sure that America's industries and workers compete on a level playing field,' Bush said in a statement issued by the White House." [USA Today, 3/5/02] Bush Flop: Bush Rescinds Steel Tariffs "Facing a potential global trade war, President Bush on [December 4, 2003] lifted tariffs he imposed on foreign steel 21 months ago, declaring the U.S. steel industry healthy and ready to compete despite the industry's claim that it needs

quote:

This are issues he has "waffled around" in. This doesnt even take into account his switcharoos he pulled in Vietnam. Which i stated earlier in the thread with documents depicting his attrocities he commited while in duty. But yet he left his troops and came back to slander them all. But if you want to read more about that then read back...because I have yet to recieve any liberal response to his behavior he engaged in while over there including the film footage of himself while in duty and begging his general for the last purple heart.

Begging hsi general for his last purple heart? Source? Snopes addressed his medal situation quite nicely:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/service.asp

quote:

This war mongol shifted positions quite quickly. For instance let me take an excerpt from the first document in this thread dealing with vietnam. Maybe thats the reason why only 3 people from his original swiftboat squad support him today. He even admitted to killing innocent civilians. Explain why most people in his swiftboat call him , "an unfit leader". I much rather have a president who did not go into war than a president who was known in his squadran as an unfit commander who commited numerous unhumane attrocities. Theres even a book where the commanders speak out about him. An Individual who lives off self created blunders in his political career. http://25thaviation.org/johnkerry/id15.htm

Haha only three from his former crew support him? How many people are there in a swift boat? Well the answer is 5-6. One of those is John Kerry, and you have 4-5 crewmen left. Only ONE crewman disagreed with him, and the other three stated:

"In 1969, I was Sen. Kerry's gun mate atop of the Swift boat in Vietnam. And I just wanted to let everyone know that, contrary to all the rumors that you might hear from the other side, Sen. Kerry's blood is red, not blue. I know, I've seen it.

"If it weren't for Sen. John Kerry, on the 28th of February 1969, the day he won the Silver Star . . . you and I would not be having this conversation. My name would be on a long, black wall in Washington, D.C. I saw this man save my life."3

� Fred Short

"I can still see him now, standing in the doorway of the pilothouse, firing his M-16, shouting orders through the smoke and chaos . . . Even wounded, or confronting sights no man should ever have to see, he never lost his cool.

I had to sit on my hands [after a firefight], I was shaking so hard . . . He went to every man on that boat and put his arm around them and asked them how they're doing. I've never had an officer do that before or since. That's the mettle of the man, John Kerry."3

� David Alston

"What I saw back then [in Vietnam] was a guy with genuine caring and leadership ability who was aggressive when he had to be. What I see now is a guy who's not afraid to tackle tough issues. And he knows what the consequences are of putting people's kids in harm's way."2

� James Wasser

And his commanders stated:

Navy records, fitness reports by Kerry's commanders and scores of interviews with Swift boat officers and crewmen depict a model officer who fought aggressively in river ambushes and won the respect of many of his crewmates and commanders, even as his doubts about the war grew.

"I don't like what he said after the war," said Adrian Lonsdale, who commanded Kerry for three months in 1969. "But he was a good naval officer."2


"I don't know what conclusions you can draw about someone's ability to lead from their combat experience, but John's service was commendable," said James J. Galvin, a former Swift boat officer . . . "He played by the same rules we all did."1
http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp
[/quote]

quote:

Lets look at one of his actual voting records held publically. An actual document. http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_key...can_id=S0421103 Fact of the matter is either way you look at it, Kerry has made the mistake of publically showing his position on numerous occasions. Whether by voting or by being in interviews. The interview footages have came back to haunt him and its only a matter of time that it will come back and bite him in the rear end. Even worse he harped on a military themed speech last week and with his past catching up to him....the GOP will harp on these differences in a matter of weeks.

Ummm yea you just quoted the text of the bill I said that he voted against (1689) because he was in favor of the original bill he proposed (1796). What's your point? If your point is that it's John Kerry's fault that the Bush administration is spinning the issue or that the public is too stupid to understand why he voted the way that he did than I'm speechless.

Enjoy. Just released today by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Nice 1 minute TV commercial.

http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesu..._video_wmv.html

quote:

Originally posted by speedracer_mec

debated here before. he's using the rangefinder feature.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Haha only three from his former crew support him? How many people are there in a swift boat? Well the answer is 5-6. One of those is John Kerry, and you have 4-5 crewmen left. Only ONE crewman disagreed with him, and the other three stated:

Thanks imokruok.

I just got back home and saw the posts

Saved me the trouble from looking up data pieces.

Looks like we have actual video proof of more than 1 crewman who disagreed with him

When he took command on the swiftboat thats when the trouble began


nice video....juicy with interview snippets of swift vets

quote:

Originally posted by imokruok Enjoy. Just released today by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Nice 1 minute TV commercial. http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesu..._video_wmv.html

holy shit thats gonna sting

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo debated here before. he's using the rangefinder feature.

Dont matter.. hes still an idiot.

Making fun of Kerry and the corn? heh.

quote:

Originally posted by speedracer_mec Thanks imokruok. I just got back home and saw the posts Saved me the trouble from looking up data pieces. Looks like we have actual video proof of more than 1 crewman who disagreed with him When he took command on the swiftboat thats when the trouble began nice video....juicy with interview snippets of swift vets

Sigh ... you're not getting it. Only one of the crew who has served with Kerry on a swiftboat has disagreed with him. ALL his other crewmates stand by him.

quote:

Vietnam crewmates steady at Kerry's side By Gregg Zoroya, USA TODAY BOSTON � Thirteen of the men who fought with John Kerry in Vietnam will be on the podium Thursday night, helping introduce the nominee before he gives a speech accepting the Democratic nomination for president. John Kerry takes a water taxi across Boston Harbor with fellow Vietnam veterans. At right is the Rev. David Alston. Jack Gruber, USA TODAY Graying and near retirement, they were the boatswain and gunnery mates, the petty officers who crewed 50-foot aluminum swift boats skippered by Kerry when he was a rail-thin 25-year-old Navy lieutenant (j.g.) in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam. They are, the Kerry campaign says often, his very own Band of Brothers. (Related graphic:Behind the Scenes) The phrase is from the title of a book by the late Stephen Ambrose about World War II paratroopers bonded by the horror of war, an emotional linkage as old as human conflict. It's a theme of the Democratic convention this week: that Kerry's courage under fire is a measure of his character. His crewmen were with him as Kerry arrived in Boston on Wednesday. They laughed and swapped stories on the water-taxi ride from Logan International Airport to the Charlestown Naval Yard. Jim Rassmann, whose life Kerry saved when he pulled him into a swift boat while under fire, was made to wear a life vest. Then they turned serious, awed not just by the importance of the moment in Kerry's life but also by the simple fact that they survived and came to this moment together. "We all fought together at a very crucial period in our lives when literally we could die within the next breath," says Fred Short, 56, a computer programmer from North Little Rock In 1969, he was a gunner's third mate aboard PCF-94, the second of two boats Kerry commanded. Tonight, he and the others will attest to Kerry's courage and leadership and, they say, worthiness to lead America. "I've seen his mettle in action. I know he's a cool character under fire," Short says of his ex-commander, who earned a Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts during a tour of duty that lasted several months. "Anything I can do for Sen. John Kerry is the very least I can do for him." The Kerry campaign has a goal: 1 million veterans campaigning for one of their own. In six weeks, 100,000 have signed up, says organizer Max Cleland, the former senator from Georgia who lost both legs and an arm in Vietnam. "This is a powerful movement," he says. Democrats also see it as good political capital compared with the pilloried record of President Bush, whose service in the National Guard during the Vietnam era has been questioned. "I know what 'mission accomplished' means," says James Wasser, referring to the banner behind Bush after he landed in a jet on an aircraft carrier and proclaimed major combat over in Iraq. "We've been on missions, and we've accomplished them. Just flying onto an aircraft carrier doesn't make it." Promoting veterans is a fresh approach for a party with a legacy of peace activism. Kerry himself personified the anti-war movement when he demanded withdrawal from Vietnam during testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971. But the emphasis today is on Kerry's combat experience. Cleland says his heroism in the treacherous Mekong Delta "sets up a powerful sense of gravitas, sense of meaning ... that we haven't had in the Democratic Party since Jack Kennedy." At the core of this movement are the men who served with Kerry. They have star status here in their blue polo shirts bearing insignia of the boat on which they served with Kerry. When they speak, reporters and delegates mob them. Steven Gardner, a former gunner's mate, isn't here. He has been critical of how Kerry uses his war record and refused to join the shipmates. Critics say Kerry has capitalized on his combat stint to further his political goals. But Wade Sanders, 61, one of the ex-skippers, doesn't share that feeling. "I had to be with him, win or lose," the San Diego lawyer says. The Kerry crewmembers struggle to explain this. "I say, try to imagine what it's like if you come to a really difficult crisis in your life and the people you love come closer to you," Sanders says. "The only difference is that in combat, it happens a lot quicker, and your life depends on it." For the Rev. David Alston, 57 � then a gunner's mate aboard PCF-94, the second of two swift boats Kerry skippered in Vietnam, and now a Baptist minister from Columbia, S.C. � his devotion to the candidate led to an invitation to address the convention by himself Monday night. It was something that terrified him at first. But Alston pulled it off. "When the shooting stopped, he was always there, too, with a caring hand on my shoulder asking, 'Gunner, are you OK?' I was only 21, running on fear and adrenaline. "It's not hard, when somebody has put their life on the line, to help him," he says. "It's not hard at all." http://www.usatoday.com/news/politi...crewmates_x.htm

So you can muddy the waters with all these alleged accounts from people who supposedly went into action with him, but only ONE of those people, Steve Gardner, actually served with him on a swiftboat. But I see how it is, when you can't rally enough support among those who would know his brevity or heroism best (ie: his fellow crewmates), simply go outside that group and cherry pick the opinions voiced by those who "served" with him.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Sigh ... you're not getting it. Only one of the crew who has served with Kerry on a swiftboat has disagreed with him. ALL his other crewmates stand by him. So you can muddy the waters with all these alleged accounts from people who supposedly went into action with him, but only ONE of those people, Steve Gardner, actually served with him on a swiftboat. But I see how it is, when you can't rally enough support among those who would know his brevity or heroism best (ie: his fellow crewmates), simply go outside that group and cherry pick the opinions voiced by those who "served" with him.

http://www.swiftvets.com
Go to the real story then to quotes and facts

I tried putting the link direct but its dead for some reason.Manually going in works fine though

This should answer most of your questions. Most of the guys that are shown on the site are just able to say that they didn't commit war crimes while they were in Nam and that on that basis, John Kerry is a liar...unless he retracts everything he said in his now out of print book and to congress.

The picture is of other Swiftboat captains...Kerry's peers, not subordinates, stationed with him during his time in Nam. The thing that really got these guys going was the use of the picture and the implication (distortion) that they ALL supported him, when he knew damn well they did not.

Several swiftboat crews were all stationed in one place and worked together patrolling the delta in teams, so plenty of guys besides the ones on Kerry's boat got a really good look at John Kerry.

It is not all BS. I could see getting a half dozen guys to lie about something (like Kerry's swiftboat supporters maybe?), but not the vast number that are on this site and are willing to take a public stand against Kerry. Character is really at issue here, if the guy isn't a war hero, no way this many people would say he wasn't. I am sure that not all of them think Bush is God's gift to military service either.

One swiftboat mission when he was serving on and the other when he took command with a new group of individuals. Could Kerry's subordinates/peers/superiors be lying? Sure, anything is possible.

But what do they have to gain by lying? They were't just passing acquaintances, those people were comrade in arms, they fought alongside, protecting each other.

I don't know about them, but if I was one of those people, no political differences could make me lie about what really happened on the battlefield or fabricate false stories about those who fought alongside me. I can understand those who question his protesting the war after he served, and how he threw away other peoples medals but not his own, but how can you question whether he served bravely when he volunteered to go to vietnam, was definitely in combat and dangerous situations, and earned a medal for saving a guys life?
He did throw away other peoples medals.....that is a factual piece of data. Unbelievable isnt it?


Also regarding the war crimes. Atrocities were committed by Americans in Vietnam, no doubt. However, his characterization of he and his fellow swiftboat crews as committing ramant atrocities has simply never been supported by any serious review of the facts. I am sure that isolated incidents that qualify as war crimes did occur. However, to suggest that they were a matter of routine combat operations is pure bullshit. The rules of engagement applying to swiftboat operations were strict and are a matter of record.


Let me highlight the video from which the doctor in vietnam said...

INdirect quote--One statement is from the doctor that allegely (he says he did) treated JKerry for his first wound that led to the #1 Purple Heart. He says that he lied to get the PH. Seems to me that will be particuarlly (sp) damning because it is comming from a Vet and a doctor, two respected positions.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.