 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ROTC DAD
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 147
|
 Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 2:07 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| As I have said before in this forum, I never said I was voting fro Kerry. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep the record straight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cassidy
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 4:11 pm Post subject: Hussein |
|
|
Of course he went after Saddam Hussein! The man tried to assasinate a former president for God's sake. The fact that this happened to his father, which a lot of morons seem to seize upon, is moot. That alone was justification for us to go to war. The fact that he was not complying with security council resolutions only helped the cause. LEt's not forget one important fact: Given his past, the burden of proof was on him to prove he had no more WMDs, not for us to prove he did. He tried to play games, and look where it got him.
_________________
W '04 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carpro
Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 1176
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ROTC DAD wrote: | carpro,
I can give you a million reasons not to vote for Bush. And that's just the people who have lost their jobs. Bush is the first President since Herbert Hoover who has negative job growth. This includes Carter, Reagan, Ford, Bush 1, Clinton, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon Truman, and Roosevelt (obviously not in that order).
This does not include turning us away from our true target of Al Qeada and bin Laden so that he could go after Saddam Hussein. Nor does it include tax cuts for the wealthy as opposed to the middle class. Or an energy policy which had as its major advisors chiefs of Enron Corporation and all the major oil companies, but no one from any of the environmental organizations. Nor the Administration's penchant for taking credit for programs and activities which they tried to cut but could not and now find that they are doing what they were supposed to. Or even the illegal activities of this Administration.
Geez, I could be at this all day. So I'm not voting for Bush. I think I've made that fairly clear. |
I understand and we could debate all those issues as well as if Kerry would do better and how. I understand that you will not vote for Bush, so you'll have to pick another candidate or not vote at all. I understand all that.
It just struck me during all the debates that not one single reason to vote FOR Kerry was ever given by anyone and still hasn't been. I would hope Kerry would have some positive other than time and place and opponent.
Apparently not.
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ROTC DAD
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 147
|
| Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
carpro,
You may be right about that. I will vote - make no mistake - but whether I vote for Kerry still has to be decided. I just know there is no way I could vote for Bush and feel good about myself afterward. And I understand that that is the way you feel about Kerry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ROTC DAD wrote: | carpro,
I can give you a million reasons not to vote for Bush. And that's just the people who have lost their jobs. Bush is the first President since Herbert Hoover who has negative job growth. This includes Carter, Reagan, Ford, Bush 1, Clinton, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon Truman, and Roosevelt (obviously not in that order). |
Be interesting to hear anyone's thoughts on exactly how any of the unemployment trend, which stared in October 2001 (I have the data if you'd like it) was caused by Bush monetary policies which were not yet in effect in 2001.
Here's some data and thoughts:
http://thinkinboutstuff.netfirms.com/unemployment.htm
By the way, can anyone guess who's Presidency had a higher peak unemployment rate, Bush or Clinton? Anyone know what the median unemployment rate is from 1/1/72 through 12/31/2003? Hint: the answer is 6%
| ROTC DAD wrote: | This does not include turning us away from our true target of Al Qeada and bin Laden so that he could go after Saddam Hussein. Nor does it include tax cuts for the wealthy as opposed to the middle class. Or an energy policy which had as its major advisors chiefs of Enron Corporation and all the major oil companies, but no one from any of the environmental organizations. Nor the Administration's penchant for taking credit for programs and activities which they tried to cut but could not and now find that they are doing what they were supposed to. Or even the illegal activities of this Administration.
Geez, I could be at this all day. So I'm not voting for Bush. I think I've made that fairly clear. |
Guess I'm weathy because I got a tax cut... but wait, that's not possible because I make less than the minimum to be wealthy as defined by John Kerry.
I also don't recall turning away from our "true target"... why must we choose between the two... seems like both targets are manageable.
Regarding the energy policy... too bad the Congress didn't pass the one that was proposed. The policy in place today is a holdover from prior administrations.
The taking credit comment is too generic to provide an opinion or response... not that you wanted me to respond any way... I'm kind of butting in here.
If you'd kindly be specific about the illegal activities, I'd appreciate the opportunity to check your assertions and determine if I should factor them into my decision this coming November or discount or refute them. But so far, I'm still voting for Bush (I'm one of them Independents that used to be a Democrat then realized I wasn't really a Democrat... was just the thing to be in my home town)
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:40 am Post subject: Re: WHY I WILL VOTE FOR JOHN KERRY |
|
|
| carpro wrote: | I am opening this thread because, in my memory, I can't remember an election in which a candidates own supporters had so little good to say about him.
So tell me why I should vote FOR John Kerry and not Against George Bush.
Answer questions such as these:
How will he save social security?
How will he grow the economy?
How will he create more jobs than are being created now?
How will he save medicare?
How will he bring down healthcare costs?
Does he have any strategy to recreate the income tax system?
How much will he increase MY taxes to pay for his programs?
Or how much will he decrease my tax burden since I am definitely middle class?
Get the idea?
Sell me your candidate instead of bashing his opponent.
You can try using his Vietnam war record. I doubt you'll make much headway with this group. |
I have a slightly different question and would be very interested in having this asked in the debates:
What have you accomplished in the last 4 years, as Senator/President, and how do these accomplishments qualify you for the Presidency of the United States?
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
toast
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 22 May 2004
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:58 am Post subject: this sight is run by a religious right lunatic |
|
|
The latest conservative outfit to fire an angry broadside against John Kerry's heroic war record is Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which today launches a campaign to brand the Democrat "unfit to serve as commander in chief." Billing itself as representing the "other 97 percent of veterans" from Kerry's Navy unit who don't support his presidential candidacy, the group insists that all presidential candidates must be "totally honest and forthcoming" about their military service.
These "swift boat vets" claim still to be furious about Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony against the war in which he spoke about atrocities in Indochina's "free fire zones." More than three decades later, facing the complicated truth about Vietnam remains difficult. But this group's political connections make clear that its agenda is to target the election of 2004.
Behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are veteran corporate media consultant and Texas Republican activist Merrie Spaeth, who is listed as the group's media contact; eternal Kerry antagonist and Houston attorney John E. O'Neill, law partner of Spaeth's late husband, Tex Lezar; and retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffman, a cigar-chomping former Vietnam commander once described as "the classic body-count guy" who "wanted hooches destroyed and people killed."
Spaeth told Salon that O'Neill first approached her last winter to discuss his "concerns about Sen. Kerry." O'Neill has been assailing Kerry since 1971, when the former Navy officer was selected for the role by Charles Colson, Richard Nixon's dirty-tricks aide. Spaeth heard O'Neill out, but told him, she says, that he "sounded like a crazed extremist" and should "button his lip" and avoid speaking with the press. But since Kerry clinched the Democratic nomination, Spaeth has changed her mind and decided to donate her public relations services on a "pro bono" basis to O'Neill's latest anti-Kerry effort. "About three weeks ago, four weeks ago," she said, the group's leaders "met in my office for about 12 hours" to prepare for their Washington debut.
Although not as well known as Karen Hughes, Spaeth is among the most experienced and best connected Republican communications executives. During the Reagan administration she served as director of the White House Office of Media Liaison, where she specialized in promoting "news" items that boosted President Reagan to TV stations around the country. While living in Washington she met and married Lezar, a Reagan Justice Department lawyer who ran for lieutenant governor of Texas in 1994 with George W. Bush, then the party's candidate for governor. (Lezar lost; Bush won.)
Through Lezar, who died of a heart attack last January, she met O'Neill, his law partner in Clements, O'Neill, Pierce, Wilson & Fulkerson, a Dallas firm. (It also includes Margaret Wilson, the former counsel to Gov. Bush who followed him to Washington, where she served for a time as a deputy counsel in the Department of Commerce.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 3:23 am Post subject: Re: this sight is run by a religious right lunatic |
|
|
| toast wrote: | The latest conservative outfit to fire an angry broadside against John Kerry's heroic war record is Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which today launches a campaign to brand the Democrat "unfit to serve as commander in chief." Billing itself as representing the "other 97 percent of veterans" from Kerry's Navy unit who don't support his presidential candidacy, the group insists that all presidential candidates must be "totally honest and forthcoming" about their military service.
These "swift boat vets" claim still to be furious about Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony against the war in which he spoke about atrocities in Indochina's "free fire zones." More than three decades later, facing the complicated truth about Vietnam remains difficult. But this group's political connections make clear that its agenda is to target the election of 2004.
Behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are veteran corporate media consultant and Texas Republican activist Merrie Spaeth, who is listed as the group's media contact; eternal Kerry antagonist and Houston attorney John E. O'Neill, law partner of Spaeth's late husband, Tex Lezar; and retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffman, a cigar-chomping former Vietnam commander once described as "the classic body-count guy" who "wanted hooches destroyed and people killed."
Spaeth told Salon that O'Neill first approached her last winter to discuss his "concerns about Sen. Kerry." O'Neill has been assailing Kerry since 1971, when the former Navy officer was selected for the role by Charles Colson, Richard Nixon's dirty-tricks aide. Spaeth heard O'Neill out, but told him, she says, that he "sounded like a crazed extremist" and should "button his lip" and avoid speaking with the press. But since Kerry clinched the Democratic nomination, Spaeth has changed her mind and decided to donate her public relations services on a "pro bono" basis to O'Neill's latest anti-Kerry effort. "About three weeks ago, four weeks ago," she said, the group's leaders "met in my office for about 12 hours" to prepare for their Washington debut.
Although not as well known as Karen Hughes, Spaeth is among the most experienced and best connected Republican communications executives. During the Reagan administration she served as director of the White House Office of Media Liaison, where she specialized in promoting "news" items that boosted President Reagan to TV stations around the country. While living in Washington she met and married Lezar, a Reagan Justice Department lawyer who ran for lieutenant governor of Texas in 1994 with George W. Bush, then the party's candidate for governor. (Lezar lost; Bush won.)
Through Lezar, who died of a heart attack last January, she met O'Neill, his law partner in Clements, O'Neill, Pierce, Wilson & Fulkerson, a Dallas firm. (It also includes Margaret Wilson, the former counsel to Gov. Bush who followed him to Washington, where she served for a time as a deputy counsel in the Department of Commerce.) |
No original thoughts? Must be a Kerry supporter 
You should at least credit the author, Joe Conason of Salon.com, who, among his more "clever" outbursts, has called Condi Rice the "Artful Dodger".
Yeah, there's a "man" who's opinion we can respect.
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
toast
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 22 May 2004
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
toast
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 22 May 2004
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Keith, I see where your "original thoughts" are nothing more than posts from a religious right website.
How original. Did your Dad and your brother get you your job as well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hist/student
Lieutenant
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 243
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
unabashed comprehensive retraction
Last edited by hist/student on Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| toast wrote: | Keith, I see where your "original thoughts" are nothing more than posts from a religious right website.
How original. Did your Dad and your brother get you your job as well? |
Which site might that be. Actually, I host my own website with a combination of opinions (those would be original thoughts), researched facts and occasional opinions provided by others. Each is clearly identified to ensure there is no misunderstanding or confusion as to whether you are reading my opinion or a fact. All material that is not original is sourced and links are provided where possible.
Kinda like your posts, only you don't provide your opinions, you don't provide any facts, you provide others opinions and don't bother to acknowledge the source... otherwise, exactly the same |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hist/student
Lieutenant
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 243
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
unabashed comprehensive retraction
Last edited by hist/student on Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hist/student wrote: | | Kieth, that's funny. I'm having a ruff week and you brought a smile to my face. |
Glad I could help ... Now you've returned the favor  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grampa
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 143
Location: Eureka, CA
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My my.
3 pages of repartee about GW but no reason to vote for Kerry other than his political party affiliation.
_________________
Iraqi Freedom 2003-2004. We won't take any of that 1960s crap when We come home! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
