 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
4moreyears
Former Member
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Posts: 591
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:44 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Google dictionary came up with this tid bit. 
"Thou oughtest not to be slothful to the destruction of the miscreants, but to constrain them to obey our Lord God. --" 
_________________
 kerry returned to the United States on July 22, 1971, held a press conference publicly calling on President Nixon... for the surrender of the United States to North Vietnam. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
air_vet
PO2
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Posts: 374
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think the mods should allow us one troll a night to play with.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
4moreyears
Former Member
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Posts: 591
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Problem is they break too easy.
_________________
kerry returned to the United States on July 22, 1971, held a press conference publicly calling on President Nixon... for the surrender of the United States to North Vietnam. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArmyWife
Lieutenant
Joined: 06 Aug 2004
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:46 am Post subject: Re: question |
|
|
| SoldierForTruth wrote: | I'm not here to start smack with anybody...I just want to know why Kerry's service is so important. Don't you think that there are more important things in this election that who served where or who didn't show up for duty?
I think the people are getting away from what's important in this election...choosing a leader who will improve our economy and unemployment situation, somebody who will protect our citizens, our environment, our healthcare, our education, and just plain make these United States a better place to live.
I'm an undecided voter, just so you know, and I WILL vote in this election. Just looking for un-biased answers. |
Kerry's conduct under fire is relevant. What if we had another 9-11? Even if you are not sure if you believe all of the SwiftVet's stories, doesn't it matter that there's even a question that he might have fled down the river while the other boats all stayed with the one hit by the mine? Let's face it, the White House is a pressure cooker. It's serving in a combat zone 24-7 for 4 years. When you see the President out on the golf course, there's still an officer trailing him carrying the nuclear "football" and a bunch of aides with phones and messages from all over the world. Then there's the press. The grueling nature of our Presidential campaign process gives us an opportunity to examine a candidate's nerves for the job. Most candidates that have have serious questions like this in the past have called press conferences and answered the charges directly, with their own mouths.
It seems to me that Senator Kerry should have publicly apologized for his 1970's war crimes statements BEFORE he ever ran for President. If he had taken care of this HUGE problem ahead of time, the nation would not have to be put through this. Sure, some Vets would not have accepted the apology, but enough of them might have. It looks like he must have apologized to John McCain on a plane trip a few years ago, and McCain made peace with Kerry after being publicly furious with him for years. Why couldn't Kerry have done the same with the rest of the Vietnam Vets? Slandering thousands of Vets is surely worse than sleeping with an intern in the White House, but Clinton managed to apologize to the nation. If Kerry can't own up to his own boo-boos, then he is Unfit For Duty.
As for your other issues, I'm not convinced that a President can control the economy very much. We are clearly coming out of the recession right now, but if the tax break on stock dividends is repealed, it will hurt the stock market and a lot of old folks that rely on dividends to supplement their Social Security.
As for protecting our citizens, right now neither major party seems willing to do the racial profiling that most people think is necessary to safeguard our airports. There is an issue regarding protecting our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. When you change administrations in Washington, some desks go unfilled for a while and lots of little policies get re-looked. The current bunch at the DoD has undoubtedly learned a few costly lessons in the prosecution of 2 wars, and as the wife of a current soldier, I would hate to see a new bunch lose a few more soldiers while learning. It's that old Teddy Roosevelt quote about not changing horses in midstream, again.
Environment? Well, Congress passes the laws, bureaucrats at the EPA write the regs, and the courts decide when there's a conflict. Presidents can give a lot of lip service to the issue, and they can issue executive orders declaring land off limits. I know it's hard for anybody East of the Mississippi River to grasp this, but the government owns 50 percent of the West, and a whopping 80 percent of the State of Nevada. If you feel like more land should be protected, that's fine, but I hope you'll at least go out and visit it once in a while so it's not just sitting there unappreciated.
Healthcare? Hey, if you've got an idea how to fix this one, PLEASE tell us. Neither Republican tort reform nor Democrat socialized medicine is going to fix that mess. By the way, the TV news never tells you that doctors and hospitals see people without insurance ALL the time, and even let them make payments.
Education? President Bush and Teddy Kennedy created that "No Child Left Behind" bill together. Only time will tell if it works. Both major parties are all for pouring money into education.
If you have more issues, go ahead and post them. If you believe that character counts, then I think you'll read enough on this website to vote against Kerry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ccr
Commander
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 325
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| carpro wrote: |
Even though this is the first time you've posted, you've been prowling this forum for the past two days. I highly suspect you already have all the info you need and this last post of yours was all for show.  |
Too funny.
_________________
Whose side is John Kerry really on? Take this quiz and decide for yourself.
http://www.learnthat.com/quiz/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nomorelies
Vice Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 977
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SoldierForTruth wrote: | Oh, OK, thought I could find some answers here, but nevermind. Thanks anyway.
By the way you just missed out on an opportunity to present your case to an independant, undecided registered voter from Ohio. That's OK though, Ohio isn't that important. |
Trolls are absolutely amazing. They think they are so very clever. By the way, I want an "L"
_________________
Nomorelies Make a donation HERE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
7rrfs
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 99
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am a life long Democrat. I am also a Vietnam veteran.
First, remember that if Dean didnt melt down with his "I have a Scream," speech - none of us would be here. Kerry was choosen by the party to replace Dean. Kerry is number 2. 
Second - It was Kerry who needed the middle of the road vote to win in November. He won the nomination on his Senate record - he is considered, by the party leaders, as its most liberal Senator. These people, "ADA is America's oldest independent liberal lobbying organization" say so, not I. http://www.adaction.org/
In order to sway the middle of the roaders OFF his liberal record, Senator Kerry made his Vietnam service the center piece of the convention. He needed to convince the middle he had "the right stuff."
Third - BIG MISTAKE! He, and he alone gave the Swiftvets credibility. Without the extravaganza (sp?) of his Vietnam service at the convention - the Swifties would be so much noise.
Fourth - Read "Unfit for Command." The details will make your head spin. This man is NOT fit to be CinC. He would be a disaster. Are the Swiftvets lying? Only Kerry can clear this up by signing Standard Form-180 and releasing his full, unedited military records. He wont do this because, I suspect, he is hiding something REALLY bad!
Fifth - You are correct. We SHOULD be talking about social issues as well as national defense issues... Education, health care, the economy, the environment. That we arent talking about these issues is the fault of my party...
"AND I AM PISSED!"
And I place the blame squarely on the shoulders of Senator John Kerry.
_________________
"I served admirably in Vietnam" John Kerry
"Yes, I committed atrocities in Vietnam" John Kerry |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mike4gwb
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 21
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 7rrfs, I appreciate the wonderful reply telling us your stance. The entire family that I love is 100% Democrat, I'm the first registered Republican. They feel just like you on the issue, they feel the party leaves them more every single day. I applaud anyone breaking party ranks from either side when they feel they are standing up for something of strong belief such as this issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BC
PO3
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Posts: 288
Location: Oklahoma City
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I am thinking this may be the same Troll as Willidog, the one who scared us all by saying he was saving screenshots, and was going to prove that the swifties are in cahoots with the Bush campaign. |
ok I missed that one 
but if your still out there and taking screenshots here's one for ya
I AM A DEMOCRAT and have been since the day I turned 18 and it's scum like kerry and his liberal mafia and people like BUSH (you know the ones that still have Courage and Honor and are not afraid to stand up for what they believe in) that is making me seriously think about becoming a republican.
Do I agree with everything that Bush has done? Nope. Did I vote for him 4 years ago? YEAP! Will I vote for him again? YEAP!
Look at the last 4 years, with everything that has been thrown at Bush, Kerry would crumble hiding in a corner sucking his thumb. The last month has shown that to me. I was proud to serve under his father and I would be just has proud to serve under him. I take the words HONOR and COURAGE very seriously. AND I’LL BE DAMD if I will just sit by and watch someone like Kerry Dishonor this country AGAIN.
I stand behind Bush because he has shown that he will, no matter what, have Honor and Courage in the face of the enemy, and NO ONE who looks at the truth can say that about Mr. Kerry. Kerry has shown repeatedly that he has neither Courage or Honor. I stand behind the Swift vets 150%, but even with that if you take away everything they are saying, Kerry’s actions post Vietnam shows that he has NO Honor, for me it’s not that he protested the Vietnam war, but the way he did it.
_________________
Remember United Flight 93, "Are you guys ready? Let's roll."
Duty Honor Country |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sun Tzu
Seaman
Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 169
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:20 am Post subject: Re: question |
|
|
| SoldierForTruth wrote: | I'm not here to start smack with anybody...I just want to know why Kerry's service is so important. Don't you think that there are more important things in this election that who served where or who didn't show up for duty?
I think the people are getting away from what's important in this election...choosing a leader who will improve our economy and unemployment situation, somebody who will protect our citizens, our environment, our healthcare, our education, and just plain make these United States a better place to live.
I'm an undecided voter, just so you know, and I WILL vote in this election. Just looking for un-biased answers. |
SoldierForTruth,
I'll make no bones about it. I'm voting for George W. Bush. Let me tell you why.
First, I'll agree in part -- I believe it is fallacious to assume that just because someone has seen combat that they should be automatically qualified to make serious decisions of national defense, security, or assume that he or she possess the ability to efficiently run an entire nation. If you do, just imagine George Custer as President. Many of our best Presidents throughout history have had very little or no military experience. Among those are Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and James Polk. Having said that, military servitude and the past events of one's life do lend itself to the ultimate question of "character" -- an important issue.
My problem with Kerry is that he's an opportunist and his cronies deceive the public quite often. This conclusion doesn't just stem from the recent allegations made from the Swiftvets. But, it's the result of what I've read and observed not only from Kerry's youth -- but, throughout his entire career.
Let's start with his youth -- Vietnam. Kerry's camp has criticized Vice President Cheney for having sought and was granted deferments during Vietnam. But, what John Kerry doesn't tell you is that he, himself, personally sought a deferment to study in France for a year but was turned down (Samuel Goldhaber, "John Kerry: A Navy Dove Runs for Congress", The Harvard Crimson, 2/18/1970). Having learned that he was turned down, John Kerry decided to join the Navy (I believe this is because he idolized JFK). As soon as he returned home from having served four months in Vietnam, he joined a radical anti-war movement. In January of 1971, Mr. John Kerry, reported to Congress that U.S. soldiers in Vietnam had taken part in numerous atrocities and "generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam." He later commented that he hadn't personally witnessed these things, but was told about them. It was later discovered that the information that Mr. John Kerry presented wasn't truthful. The information Kerry used came from the anti-war protestor, Mark Lane, whose 1970 book entitled, Conversations with Americans, turned out to be less than honest. As a matter of fact, a harsh critic of the war, Neil Sheehan, discovered that many of the "eye witnesses" that Lane had utilized weren't soldiers, had never been near a combat zone, or were completely fictitious. Widespread war atrocities is one of the greatest myths that still surrounds the Vietnam War. As a matter of fact, there are only two cases of war crimes that are attributed to American personnel. One was that the village of My Lai and the other was at Son Thang-4. There is one other investigation currently underway, but as of right now, it has yielded nothing of substance. The fact remains that approximately 97% of soldiers received an honorable discharge -- the same percentage of honorable discharges as ten years prior to the war. Also, approximately 91% of Vietnam soldiers are glad that they had served. Another interesting statistic is that Vietnam Veterans are less likely to be in prison than a regular civilian -- only 1/2 of one percent of Vietnam Veterans have been jailed for crimes. In April of 1971, at an anti-war protest within Washington, D.C., Kerry led members of the VVAW in a protest. At this protest he hurled his medals in disgust over a fence at the nation's Capitol. It was later revealed that Mr. John Kerry didn't even use his own medals -- he borrowed somebody else's. Or, was it just his ribbons? You'll have to ask Kerry this one -- it changes week to week. Only two of John Kerry's twenty-three fellow Swift boat commanders, from Coastal Division 11, support his candidacy today (Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry; Author(s) John E. O'Neill, Jerome R. Corsi; 2004).
Kerry and his camp state over and over that Bush misled the American people about Iraq. If this is the case, then President Clinton and John Kerry both misled the American people as well. Kerry supported President Clinton's attacks on Iraq in 1998 because, "Americans need to really understand the gravity and legitimacy of what is happening with Saddam Hussein. He has been given every opportunity in the world to comply. The president does not control the schedule of UNSCOM. The president did not withdraw the UNSCOM inspectors. And the president did not, obviously, cut a deal with Saddam Hussein to do this at this moment. Saddam Hussein has not complied. Saddam Hussein is pursuing a program to build weapons of mass destruction” (Senator John Kerry, Press Conference, 12/16/98).
In 2002, Kerry insisted, “The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last four years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for four years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation” (Senator John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10171). But, I digress. I guess that now, in 2004, Bush has magically misled the American people about Iraq.
John Kerry says that President Bush rushed to war against Iraq. But, as the war began in March of 2003, Kerry said "Saddam Hussein has *chosen* to make military force the ultimate weapons inspections enforcement mechanism” (Glen Johnson, “Critics Of Bush Voice Support For The Troops,” The Boston Globe, 3/20/03). Let's not forget that Kerry voted in favor of the "Iraq War Resolution." Kerry also states that he would have gotten France and Germany on board in regards to Iraq. How was he planning on doing this? Hussein was giving oil kickbacks to these countries.
Does John Kerry really support our troops in Iraq? When asked on September 14, 2003, if he would vote against the $87 billion (money to supply body armor, etc.) if his amendment did not pass, Kerry said, "I don't think any United States senator is going to abandon our troops and recklessly leave Iraq to whatever follows as a result of simply cutting and running. That's irresponsible." Guess what? He voted against it.
Just recently, Kerry boasted that he will "revamp the CIA" in lieu of the latest report that addresses the fact the CIA was ravaged by cuts to the agency in the 1990's. Clinton gutted the agency by removing almost all of our human intelligence in favor of technology. What Kerry doesn't tell you is that after the first WTC bombing, in 1994, Kerry proposed an amendment to cut $7 billion from intelligence funding. He also proposed to freeze their existing budgets. The amendment was defeated 20-75. Even his liberal cohort, Ted Kennedy, voted against it.
Finally, let's examine John Kerry's pandering on social issues. Life begins when -- and you support what? Kerry states that he believes "life begins at conception" but, that he remains "pro-choice." So, by that rationale Kerry believes that he's murdering innocent children and doesn't have a problem with women murdering their children. Kerry gives me flashbacks to history class -- in particular, the Civil War. Kerry reminds me of politicians during this era stating that they were personally against slavery, but because the courts supported slavery -- then he must support the right for an individual to own a slave. What happened to conviction? What happened to fighting for equality and human rights? John Kerry also says he'll fight tooth and nail for prescription drug coverage. Yes, indeed, Kerry is so concerned about healthcare that he missed one of the most important votes in history. Kerry missed voting on the "Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act" in November of 2003. The package included everything from Medicare benefits, premium caps, drug patents, drug cost coverage, cancer care, to retiree coverage. Apparently, Kerry thought it was more important to campaign for the Presidency rather than to actually vote on a bill that would aid millions of American people.
I figure, in the end, John Kerry and his fellow loyalists will resort to throwing around conspiracy theories about Vice President Cheney and Halliburton. If they venture into that territory, people need to ask John Kerry why having had lobbied for renewed trade relations with Hanoi in 1991 -- it was revealed that his cousin, C. Stewart Forbes, the Chief Executive for Colliers International, was going to assist in brokering a deal worth millions in upgrading Vietnam's railroads, ports, highways, and various government buildings? Halliburton won its first LOGCAP contract in 1992. Halliburton put out approximately 350 oil well fires in Kuwait after the first Gulf War. It's interesting how Democrats didn't have a problem with Bill Clinton awarding a no-bid contract to Halliburton during the conflict within the Balkans in order to support U.S. peacekeepers. Halliburton didn't even have a LOGCAP contract at this time -- it had lost the contract in 1997. Al Gore went on to praise Halliburton for its military logistics work. In 2001, Halliburton won the LOGCAP contract yet again. Bush's decision was logical. As the Army Corps of Engineers commander, Lt. Gen. Robert Flowers, wrote in 2003, "To invite other contractors to compete to perform a highly classified requirement [putting out oil fires] that Kellogg Brown & Root was already under a competitively awarded contract to perform would have been a wasteful duplication of effort."
Sincerely,
Sun Tzu |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sun Tzu
Seaman
Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 169
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
SoldierForTruth,
Here are some numbers.
1. Unemployment Rate -
Jan 2004: 5.6% (After GWBush's 1st three years)
Change in rate from prior year (Jan '03-'04): 0.3%, Decrease
Jan 1996: 5.6% (After Bill Clinton's 1st three years)
Change in rate from prior year (Jan '95-'96): 0.0%, No change
* The Unemployement Rate is the same after GWBush's 1st three years as it was after Bill Clinton's 1st three years.
* The Unemployment rate steadily declined in the third year with GWBush while it remained unchanged in Bill Clinton's third year.
Source:
Bureau of Labor Statistics
2. Poverty Rate For Families (Two-Year Average) -
2001-2002: 9.40% (GWBush's 1st two years)
1993-1994: 12.95% (Clinton's 1st two years)
1993-2000: 10.50% (Average for Clinton's full eight years)
* The % of families living in poverty is lower after two years under GWBush than after two years under Bill Clinton - even lower than 7 out of 8 of Clinton's years in office.
Source:
US Census
3. Percent of People Below 50 Percent of Poverty Level (Two-Year Average) -
2001-2002: 4.95% (GWBush's 1st two years)
1993-1994: 6.05% (Clinton's 1st two years)
1993-2000: 5.31% (Average for Clinton's full eight years)
* The % of people living in deep poverty is lower after two years under GWBush than after two years under Bill Clinton - even lower than the average across Clinton's entire TWO terms of office... AND lower than ANY of Clinton's 1st six years in office.
Source:
US Census
4. Homeownership Rate -
GWBush's 1st three years:
4th Quarter 2000: 67.5% (before GWBush)
4th Quarter 2003: 68.6% (after 3 years of GWBush)
Difference: +1.1%
Bill Clinton's 1st three years:
4th Quarter 1992: 64.4% (before Clinton)
4th Quarter 1995: 65.1% (after 3 years of Clinton)
Difference: +0.7%
* The Homeownership Rate is higher under GWBush's 1st three years than under Bill Clinton's 1st three years.
* The Homeownership Rate grew MORE in the 1st three years with GWBush than in the 1st three years with Bill Clinton.
Source:
US Census
5. Inflation Rate -
GWBush's 1st three years:
Jan 2001: 3.73% (before GWBush)
Jan 2004: 1.93% (after 3 years of GWBush)
Difference: 1.8% Decrease
Bill Clinton's 1st three years:
Jan 1993: 3.26% (before Clinton)
Jan 1996: 2.73% (after 3 years of Clinton)
Difference: 0.53% Decrease
* The Inflation Rate is lower after three years of GWBush than it was after Bill Clinton's first three years.
* The Inflation Rate declined over three times greater under GWBush than under Bill Clinton.
Source:
InflationData.com
6. National Debt per American Citizen -
1940-1950: Increased at 11.2% annual rate. (WWII and reconstruction)
1990-2000: Increased at 1.6% annual rate. (no lengthy military conflicts)
2000-2004: Increased at 2.5% annual rate. (Afghanistan, Iraq, reconstruction and war on terror)
* The national debt per citizen is growing at a rate nearly equal to the "peace-time" rate of the 1990s.
Sources:
US Treasury
US Census
CPI-calculator
7. The Federal Deficit As A Percentage Of GDP -
Avg. Post-WWII (1946-2002): 1.6%
GWBush Budget (2002-2008): 1.8%
* As a % of The GDP, The Deficit Under GWBush Nearly Identical To The 58-Year, Post-WWII Average.
Sources:
American Farm Bureau Federation Analysis
Citing OMB Statistics
8. Employment Numbers (Total US Civilian labor force ) -
GWBush Starts, Jan 2001:
Employed: 135,999,000
Unemployed: 5,956,000
"discouraged": 303,000
3 Years Later, Feb 2004:
Employed: 138,301,000 (+2,302,000 more than 2001)
Unemployed: 8,170,000 (+2,214,000 more than 2001)
"discouraged": 484,000 (+184,000 more than 2001)
* Number of employed people increased by 88,000 more than the number of unemployed people under GWBush.
* Even factoring in those who're "discourged" and stopped looking for work, the increase in unemployed+discouraged was less than 100,000 more than the increase in employed.
Sources:
Bureau of Labor Statistics
9. Tax Burden, "Middle-Class Family" compared to "Rich Family"-
Taxes Owed by "Middle-Class Family", Head of Household, 2 kids, $35,000/yr Income:
Before Bush Tax Cut: $1,128
After Bush Tax Cut: $328
Net Change: $800 LESS taxes owed.
Taxes Owed by "Rich Family", Head of Household, 2 kids, $250,000/yr Income:
Before Bush Tax Cut: $65,879
After Bush Tax Cut: $61,963
Net Change: $3,916 LESS taxes owed.
* Effect of Bush's Tax Cut On "Rich Family": Tax Burden Reduced by 5.94%
* Effect of Bush's Tax Cut On "Middle-Class" Family: Tax Burden Reduced by 70.95%
Source:
Heritage Foundation
10. Earnings, Private Sector (all figures in 2004 dollars, CPI-adjusted) -
Average Hourly Earnings Under GWBush:
Jan. 2001: $14.79
Feb. 2004: $15.52 (+4.9% increase)
Average Hourly Earnings Under Clinton:
Jan. 1993: $14.29
Feb. 1996: $14.33 (+0.3% increase)
* +4.9% Increase In Avg Hourly Earnings Under GWBush's 1st Three Years.
* +0.3% Increase In Avg Hourly Earnings Under Clinton's 1st Three Years.
Average Weekly Earnings Under GWBush:
Jan. 2001: $507.27
Jan. 2004: $523.56 (+3.2% increase)
Average Weekly Earnings Under Clinton:
Jan. 1993: $493.35
Jan. 1996: $487.87 (-1.1% decrease)
* +3.2% Increase In Avg Weekly Earnings Under GWBush's 1st Three Years.
* -1.1% Decrease In Avg Weekly Earnings Under Clinton's 1st Three Years.
Sources:
Bureau of Labor Statistics |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Son Of The Godfather
Captain
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 540
Location: Camarillo, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sun Tzu,
Outstanding post - shamelessly stealing it for use.
SOTG
_________________
"Which candidate would enemies of the United States prefer to see in the White House?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArmyWife
Lieutenant
Joined: 06 Aug 2004
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sun Tzu, that was FABULOUS! I had never seen some of that stuff! I, too, will pass it on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
7rrfs
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 99
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sun Tzu
This is so going to make the rounds!
_________________
"I served admirably in Vietnam" John Kerry
"Yes, I committed atrocities in Vietnam" John Kerry |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Integrity
Seaman Apprentice
Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 92
Location: California
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
There is no Democrat party. The party of Harry Truman was hijacked by what I can only describe as communists. It's just that the media does such a wonderful job of disguising them that people that voted democrat all their lives don't realize the distinction. But there is a huge distinction.
When you pull the lever, punch the chad, whatever for a D you vote for all that is rotten in Washington. This isn't a site about the corruption of a political party but their standard bearer at he moment. And that alone should tell you something.
John Kerry would get us all killed.
_________________
"What our enemies have begun, we will finish,"
- President George W. Bush |
|
| 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
