SwiftVets.com

[thomasfly]

Everybody grab a plate- Kerry's goose is cooked!

The Dem's are saying that Usama attacked Bush to help Kerry- it's kinda convoluted, and probably attributes more intelligence to Usama than he actually has- but it might be true.

Under Bush's leadership, after all, our military forces and intelligence operatives have been kicking Al Qaeda's asses. So Islamic extremists despise Bush almost as much as Kerry and the Dem's do, making Bush a great recruiting tool for Al Qaeda.

What terrorist could work up a lather over Kerry, who promises to prosecute a more "sensitive" war against them (I guess he'd start by calling 1-800-FLOWERS, and having 2 dozen long-stemmed roses delivered to Usama!).

I have 2 computers running simultaneously, in an automated fashion, trying to submit the following as a review of "Unfit for Command," but Amazon's site claims that their "review system is currently unavailable."

Or, maybe they're only accepting 1-star reviews...

In an attempt to bury credible commentary, these pages are being flooded with 1-star "reviews" by proto-hominids who haven't read the book; these individuals include apparent American-wannabes living in Europe (e.g., T. J. Killeen of LEEDS, Yorkshire, United Kingdom; "Where is Lee Harvey Oswald when you need him?").

You can thwart this effort (using myself as an example), by clicking on my name, then the "Email this page to a friend" link. By clicking on "Reviews Written," the recipient can read any of my reviews.

By the way... I've alerted the office of Attorney General Ashcroft regarding Mr. Killeen's threat, so that at the very least, he won't be able to board an airplane to the U.S.

There's also obvious "voter fraud" occurring here, in favor of John Kerry... though perhaps nothing on the scale of- or of the importance- that may occur November 2.

After being on Amazon since mid-2003- and receiving more "helpful" votes than either of the 2 "Spotlight reviews," my review of Dr. Lynne Cheney's book, "Telling the Truth," was deleted by someone at Amazon, just as the Presidential campaign was heating up. The title of that review, "There should be a zero stars rating for Zeroes to use," applies equally well to the flood of contrived 1-star reviews appearing here.

Echoing the review here, titled "Critical Thinking is Gone," in her book Cheney devotes an entire chapter to the importance of critical thinking (for those who actually CARE about uncovering the truth, to the best of their abilities).

After being missing for the past several months, my review of Cheney's book has now been restored, but a longer essay containing it is on my website (the link may be found by clicking on my name, then "see more"); currently, since July 20, there have been about 12700 readers, around the world. Quoting from it on the subject of critical thinking:

The Presidential campaign also demonstrates a pervasive and profound lack of critical thinking... For example, in an attempted interview with John O'Neill on "Scarborough Country" on MSNBC, Oct. 22 (with Pat Buchanan substituting for Scarborough), Lawrence O'Donnell ("Senior MSNBC Political Analyst") - in the great tradition of Harvard-educated boors - largely prevented him from speaking, by constantly & loudly calling him "liar! liar!"

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." - Hamlet

as Mr. O'Neill attempted to make the point- despite the "proof" offered by the Kerry-bronze-star report written at the time- that there had been no fire from the enemy during Kerry's best known "swift boat" incident, by citing facts that are apparently disputed by no one who was present:

1) the 4 undamaged swift boats remained in the area where one was sunk by a mine for approximately 45 minutes

2) the river was about 75 yards wide, so a boat (which was 51 feet in length) in the middle of the river would have been little more than 100 feet from the river banks

3) none of the men on the boats were wounded by bullets, nor was there damage to any of the boats due to gunfire, and

4) the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese soldiers did not have a reputation for being lousy shots...

(end of quote)

If John Kerry could kill a poor little goose from 20 yards away or more, during his recent photo op in Pennsylvania, well...

Senator Bob Dole- a genuine World War II hero who has the partial paralysis to prove it- had some critical thinking of his own to offer recently, remarking that it was inconceivable to him that someone could be awarded 3 Purple Hearts in less than 4 months (getting Kerry a ticket back to the States), without ever spending a day in the hospital.

(By the way, I only rate "Unfit for Command" 3-stars because I didn't read it, and there's no "I have no qualified opinion about the book itself" option to choose from- none of the 1-star "reviewers" of Dr. Cheney's book are honest enough to state the fact that they didn't read her book, before launching into their inventive, and generally incoherent anti-administration diatribes.)

My online essay also has some other good stuff, like a photo of a guy barbequed in Hiroshima, at a distance of 1 kilometer (0.6 miles) from Ground Zero- to give some idea of what Vice President Cheney is warning about- as well as a scanned page from a book that gives the etiology of the word "Bull" (and its more common derivatives).

"Bull," etc., has nothing to do with farm animals, but rather it traces its roots to one Obadiah Bull- an Irishman that lived in the 18th Century- who was, like John Kerry (and most of the leadership of the Political Wing of the American Bar Association a.k.a. Democratic Party)... a LAWYER.

Kerry's spent the past 18 months using the phrase "failed miserably" in virtually every sentence- hopefully, in only 6 more days, he can finally say "As the charlatan, demagogue, and narcissistic liar that I am, I have FAILED MISERABLY in my ego-driven attempt to con the American people into giving me the most important job the world's superpower has to offer."

An excellent example of Kerry's willingness to say whatever he feels will help him become the #1 Hot Shot in the World, is his continued harping on the supposed disappearance of 380 tons of HMX and RMX- explosives particularly well suited for triggering atomic bombs (he doesn't mention, in making this criticism, his months of harping on the claim that President Bush "lied to the American people" about Saddam having such dangerous substances).

This "hot story"- which Dan Rattler intended to run on "Sixty Lies" 2 days before the election- has been known to responsible authorities since the day before our troops entered Baghdad. It was recently "leaked" by persons associated with the U.N. That is, it was leaked by persons outside of the United States who want to influence our election, defeat George Bush, and maybe get the heat off the "Oil for Palaces and Weapons and Kickbacks to John Kerry's Friends in France" scandal.

The fact is that these explosives were known about prior to the invasion, and it was a priority to secure them. However, the day our troops entered Baghdad, a detail was sent to locate them in the vast weapons complex, but they'd already been moved- so this "hot story" is just so much anti-Bush BS.

Like the "Oil for Food" sham that was starving the Shiite children of Iraq, John Kerry's advice- to "give the inspectors more time to do their work"- would have been turned by Saddam into an opportunity for "more time for me to hide my Witches' Brew in the desert."

And neither Kerry, nor the New York Whines which broke this non-story, mention the 400,000 tons of explosives that already have been destroyed by American & British forces, or are being guarded by them, awaiting destruction.

So gee, I wonder when Kerry will say that he made a mistake, in rushing to make false allegations based upon incorrect intelligence (to the extent that anything in the New York Times represents intelligence)- or is he too stubborn to admit his mistakes and learn from them?

If you're smart enough to use your Windows calculator to compute the fact that, per million population, the United States has 45 lawyers for every 1 lawyer that the rest of the world has, then you're smart enough to see through John Kerry (and if you aren't that smart, well, vote your emotions).

In his debate with John Edwards, Mr. Cheney thanked the lame-duck North Carolina Senator for his "kind words" regarding his daughter Mary ("kind"... right... try "dissembling!"). However, John Kerry's similar "kind words" - with none of the Cheney's in attendance, and no permission from them to spotlight any family member before a viewing audience of 40 million people, IN REGARD TO ANY TOPIC WHATSOEVER - belie a sleazy... and poorly thought-out... strategy of attempting to discourage "religious right" supporters from going to the polls on November 2nd, to vote for the Bush / Cheney team, in this tightly contested election.

Immediately after the debate, Kerry's campaign director Mary Beth Cahill referred to Mary Cheney as "fair game" (like the minding-its-own-business goose killed by Kerry?).

John Edwards wife - who is also a lawyer - also has seen fit to weigh-in, with her divine insight into the feelings of the Cheney's. She suggests that Vice President and Dr. Cheney's outrage indicates that their daughter is an embarrassment to them.

And regarding the review that claims that Gen. John Eisenhower will vote for John Kerry, I think there's a good chance his dad, President Dwight D. Eisenhower may as well!

Like the 2000 election, in 1960, Richard Nixon won the popular vote, but lost in the electoral college to John Kennedy. President Eisenhower advised Nixon to demand a recount, but Nixon declined, saying that he wouldn't put the country through that kind of turmoil.

Frank Sinatra was a mutual friend of Kennedy and a Chicago mobster, with whom Kennedy shared a girlfriend (introduced to him by Sinatra). The Chicago mobster often boasted to his girlfriend that he put Kennedy in the White House (probably even some of the folks that the mobster had put in the cemetery cast votes for Kennedy).

Nixon's refusal to throw the country into turmoil by demanding a recount starkly contrasts with the Kerry campaign's pre-declared goal of doing exactly that, if they don't get their way on election day.

Nixon (who would have been impeached, like that other lawyer-President in recent memory, had he not resigned) may have been dishonest & sleazy in many respects, but you'll have to admit, he was no match for John Kerry.

Here's a tip on how bad the U.S. economy is, John:
California, with about 10% of the U.S. population, currently would have the 4th largest economy in the world, if it were a sovereign nation.

Here's an observation about the President's "failure" to put 450,000 American troops in Iraq:
150,000 troops toppled Saddam in 3 weeks. To field an invasion force of 300,000 additional troops would have required many more months and vastly more money than the $87 billion you voted-for-before-voting-against; and, due to considerations about the weather, might have meant a delay of an entire year- another year for Saddam to prepare defenses for a war his pals in France assured him they could prevent. Furthermore, 3 times as many troops would be 3 times as many targets, for the terrorists and Saddam loyalists- so it's hardly certain that more troops would have meant fewer casualties / fatalities, rather than MORE casualties.

And here's a question for you, Senator:
Since you're the only one talking about possibly bringing back the draft, and the need for more troops in Iraq, does that mean that, if elected President, you'll urge Congress to reinstate the draft? (If so, don't count on it- Congress almost certainly will continue to be controlled by the Republicans.)

I've never heard Kerry, himself, respond to the statement that he voted against every major weapon system (such as the F-18 Hornet, whose multi-mode programmable radar contains my initials, in tiny gold letters, in acknowledgement of an analog circuit design breakthrough I made, while working at Hughes Aircraft Company) that was responsible for our lightning victories against the Taliban in Afghanistan, and Saddam's dictatorship in Iraq, but Alan Colmes of Fox News makes the usual claim that "Dick Cheney voted against every weapon system that John Kerry opposed."

Either Colmes is lying, or he just doesn't know the facts. Cheney was one of the most conservative members in the House of Representatives, and was the minority whip of the House before he became Secretary of Defense under President Bush, Sr. While in the House, he voted for the development of the B-2 stealth bomber; as Secretary of Defense, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, he used his influence to end its production, however, since it was an enormously expensive weapon system- intended to penetrate the massive Soviet air defenses in the event of nuclear war... and to give the Soviets that to think about, before initiating a war- which could not be justified in the post-Soviet world.

The economic prosperity that the United States enjoyed during Bill Clinton's time in office had more to do with the "peace dividend" from the end of the Cold War, than any brilliant economic strategies thought up by Clinton- but most Democrats aren't bright enough to figure that out.

As I say in my online essay, just as "there must be 50 ways to leave your lover," there must be 50 ways to be a liar. One such way is to "forget" the context of the facts in question...

However, the worst fraud John Kerry is perpetrating upon the American people (actually, it's just as likely that he's simply ignorant of the facts), is the notion that the Clinton administration had an effective policy of containing the nuclear ambitions of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il.

In exchange for the dictator's agreement not to make plutonium, Clinton (i.e., the U.S. taxpayers) gave North Korea billions of dollars per year in food aid (kind of a "No Nukes for Food" program), allowing them to continue to devote their meager resources to their military, and preventing the regime from crumbling from within, like the Soviet Union. North Korea apparently kept the agreement (technically), though President Bush says they cheated.

It's difficult to know what North Korea has or doesn't have, since the regime is as opaque to intelligence resources as was Saddam's Iraq, but the best intelligence is that, while North Korea ceased trying to make plutonium, they embarked upon a program to enrich uranium- the fuel used in the Hiroshima bomb. Clinton's brilliant treaty didn't say they couldn't enrich uranium...

You know how the TV commentators reflexively use the term "Saddam Hussein's elite Republican Guard"- where the word "elite" evidently meant "regularly fed" (in contrast to the "regular" Iraqi army)?

12 years ago, when Dick Cheney became Secretary of Defense under President Bush, Sr., and up until at least 4 years ago, when he became Vice President, in virtually the same reflexive way he was referred to as "the highly-respected Dick Cheney"...

"highly respected" on BOTH sides of the halls of Congress, much as (and to an even higher degree than) John McCain and Joe Lieberman are today.

Incidentally, both of those men state emphatically that toppling Saddam was a necessity, rather than- as John Kerry would have us believe- a fun game thought up by George Bush to waste billions of dollars, and get hundreds of our brave soldiers wounded or killed.

I had to wonder why Mr. Cheney would leave behind his 7-figure salary at Halliburton for such a high-profile position as VP, to re-enter the dirty world of politics... the latest last-minute dirt thrown up in the air by the Kerry surrogates has to do with alleged wrong-doing in awarding no-bid contracts to Halliburton, the company formerly headed by Mr. Cheney.

The "whistleblower," who is described as an Army contracting officer, has not been fired from her job, and her allegation is being properly investigated by the FBI, which is under the direction of Attorney General John Ashcroft (just as the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal was handled in a manner consistent with the oh-so-rare integrity of the United States of America).

It's entirely possible that her allegation has some merit (thankfully most people- other than Dan Rattler of "Can't Backup Story"- in this country believe in the principle that an accused... including a company such as Halliburton... is "innocent until proven guilty")- though the sly use of "Halliburton," by Kerry spokespersons, as a synonym for "Vice President Cheney," has NO MERIT.

However, legitimate or not, the TIMING of the allegation suggests that this is just another desperate, last-minute, political dirty trick devised by the Kerry campaign...

or its supporters- ask yourself what the chances are that Bunnatine Greenhouse is voting for Bush / Cheney!...

along with their silly lies that Bush is going to "privatize Social Security in January," is responsible for the shortage of flu vaccine (rather than hot-snot trial lawyers like John Edwards, who've driven all but 1 flu vaccine manufacturer in the U.S. out of business), and oh yeah, did I mention the hurricanes in Florida*?

* assuming they were caused by global warming... though I'd blame the Democrats for that, given all the hot air generated by the Kerry campaign.

I really thought it was a mistake for the Republicans to feature Zell Miller as the keynote speaker at their convention. When I heard that he would be the speaker, I thought, "He'll say about the same thing, content-wise, as Dick Cheney will say, but Cheney will make his points in a civil, non-personal, and thoughtful way."

A while back, a somewhat presumptuous fellow, from Indiana, said to me, "You don't see it, because you're from the South, but Georgians are mean... they're mean people." And a brother- who got stuck in Georgia after his tour of duty with the Air Force ended- remarked, "While most people came to this country seeking economic prosperity or religious freedom, middle-Georgia was a penal colony, settled by criminals and other riff-raff from England, and all that's still in the gene pool."

Miller's angry and hateful speech- as well as his borderline psychotic retort to Chris Matthews on "Hardball" (I call it "Spitball"), that "I wish we lived in a time when you could challenge a person to a duel!"- bore out my concern.

In the Vice Presidential debate, Mr. Cheney basically wiped the floor with John Edwards (good thing that Edwards was so wet-behind-the-ears, wouldn't want to try that with a dry mop!), being blunt and tough- given the high stakes for the country and the world- but without being mean and personal, like Zell Miller (and frankly like Edwards was, with his dissembling "kind words" about Mary Cheney).

Joe Jackson has a song, "Real Men"

Take your mind back - I don't know when
Sometime when it always seemed
To be just us and them
Girls that wore pink
And boys that wore blue
Boys that always grew up better men
Than me and you

And so it goes - go round again
But now and then, we wonder who the real men are!

The United States has 10 times the population it had during the Civil War, so where are the Lincoln's and the Thomas Jefferson's of today?

Dick Cheney is one. As are John McCain and Joe Lieberman- and to my pleasant surprise, perhaps even South Carolina's new Senator, Lindsey Graham. But Dick Cheney is the only one who is sufficiently high-profile to have the same kind of hatred directed against him that Lincoln suffered.

Don't get me wrong- I like Bush- but I'm really, really glad he's got someone wiser, and more experienced than John Edwards to help him!

Soon, we'll find out whether or not the Big Lie works as well in America, in 2004, as it did in the Germany, in 1934. If it does, then America will deserve much the same consequences that Germany reaped, under Adolf Hitler.

And for all you Kerry Kids, and Soviet-Union-nostalgists living in Europe, that read enough of this to realize it doesn't support John Kerry, I apologize for using some kinda big words; for it being much too long for your limited attention spans; and for literary, historical, and scientific references that pass over your heads; as well as logical arguments you're unable to follow... I just hope that if the terrorists do nuke an American or European city, it's yours and not mine*! I'd regard that outcome simply as an example of Darwin's theory of "survival of the fittest"

* See my online essay for a pic of what a "little" 17-kiloton nuke will turn you into, if you're unlucky enough only to be a kilometer away, when it goes off.

[jwb7605]