SwiftVets.com

[stevec]

I believe they picked John Kerry for several reasons.

1. Having a defeatable Democrat like Kerry, ensures NO re-election in 2008. Hence, Hiliary can just waltz right in and save the day.
2. By picking Kerry, the Demo's will "see their ways" and try to reform themselves. Again, Hiliary to the rescue in 2008. With a new spin.
3. By concentrating on Kerry, the Senate and Congressional races are barely being touched. Again, a few seats here and there, they control both houses and Bush is basically dead-locked for the second term.
4. They [Demo's] realize that's it's hard if not impossible to change the Presidency during a war, therefore they look to the future. They figure they can bide their time and eventually they will get what they have coming to them.

Just a few thoughts.

Steve Christensen
_________________
Keep Kerry Out
Kerry is a TRAITOR
Kerry is UNFIT


Steve Christensen

[nakona]

I have long held the view that Kerry is meant to lose, to clear the boards for Hillary.

Lately though, I have begun to wonder if they are institutionally capable of planning that far ahead. I have no doubt the Clinton's are, but I'll tell ya... It speaks volumes about the current state of the democratic party that the CLINTON'S seem more professional by comparison.
_________________
13F20P

[Navyolsalt]

I completely agree and fully expect to see Bush get re-elected and Hillary run in 2008. Kerry is terrible but Hillary is worse and we will have our work cut out for us to defeat Hillary in 2008!
Sincerely,
Robert K. Tucker
RMCS USN (Ret.)
MACV-SOG 1969-1970
PCF's and PTF's in "I Corps"

[Porsche944]

I have always thought that whoever the Dems picked would loose for the simple fact that "Her Highness" was not in a position to run until at least '08.

Gore was given the nod in '00 as a reward for the previous 8 years with the hope that he could beat the GOP's man, and then turn things over to "Her Highness".

The scary part is, if Kerry wins, there is no need for Hiliary to run, and if Kerry doesn't "screw the pooch", Hillary could run in '12.

Can you imagine what 16 years of rabid liberalism would do to this country?

Remember what "the Peanut Farmer" did? Aerospace engineers layed off and pumping gas or flipping burgers after he canceled the B-1 bomber and several other projects, taxes and inflatin through the roof, and the Iranians stormed the embassy is Teheran?

Thank God for Ronald Regan!
_________________
Cliff Hipsher
ICC USN (Ret.)
7/70-6/92

[sore loser]

[Porsche944]

I've had a bad feeling about the Clintons from the very beginning, and I voted against "Slick Willy" (a nick-name he absolutely hates, so I use it every chance I get!) twice.

Unfortunately my wife and step-son are not given to voting based on character, so I'm always over-trumped.
_________________
Cliff Hipsher
ICC USN (Ret.)
7/70-6/92

[Grampa]

It is actually simpler than all the Clinton conspiracy stuff. The bulk of the Dems delegates are left wing. ALL of the candidates for the Dem nominations that remained viable thru the convention competed with each other to be more anti-war and anti-Bush than the rest; note how quickly Joe Leiberman and Ewards, who both supported the Iraq war, went down. Dean only flamed out when it became apparent that he was unstable.

Their may be an element of plotting for Hillary as she would definately NOT be able to compete against a sitting wartime president, but I also don't think she will ever be elected as she is so VERY nakedly power hungry; the general public doesn't LIKE her and one has to be likeable to have a serious shot at the WH. Maybe in another 8 years when alot has been forgotten, but if she runs alot of her past will be brought back up, including her work for pro-Communist organizations in the 60s and her "co-presidency" meddling and power trips of the Billary years.

This is a party that is enthralled to the hate Bush, anti-war leftist and Communist remnants of the Cold War. That is their base and they play to it. They only put on the War Hero costume at their "convention" which was actually more of an infomercial directed at fooling undecideds and veterans that they were more centrist than they actually are.

Note that the pro-war stuff didn't excite the Dem delegates; they got pumped when Al Sharpton and Ted Kennedy came on to rip Bush, not when speakers showed support for the troops. Note that Michael Moore sat next to Jimmy Carter (who never has met a Communist dictatator that he didn't embrace) in a place of honor and no one thought twice about it in the MSM or the convention. This is telling.

They are the party of MoveOn, ANSWER, Not In Our Name, the Ruckus Society, Michael Moore and all the other left wing kooks that hate America more than they hate Islamikazi terrorists. These are also the heirs of the 1960s Communist led anti war movement. This also is telling.

John Kerry reflects that, so he is their man. They expected to ride a wave of Bush hatred into the WH and thought they had it sown up after their convention. But now they have been exposed by the New Media; internet (thanks SBVT) and bloggers.

How else can their free fall in the polls be explained?
_________________
Iraqi Freedom 2003-2004. We won't take any of that 1960s crap when We come home!

[Jerry M]

I am one who believes that either Rudy Giuliani or John McCain would clean Hillary's clock if they were to run in 2008. A NYT poll recently revealed that most respondents feel that the Clinton administration failed to do what was necessary to prevent 9/11. The case could easily be made that Hillary was an integral part of the policies made while Slick Willy was in office. Besides, I think if Bush gets another four years, some things are going to happen that will put Republicans in even a better position for 2008.

[DanVCC]

These thoughts are interesting but off the mark in that we are trying to expose a liar who is trading on lies about his military experience for personal gain.
To the subject, however, I add my conjecture that Kerry will not be the candidate come election day but will resign and be replaced with Senator Clinton.

[stevec]

Is it possible for them to do that, switch candidates. It might be a first, but I wouldn't put it past them.
_________________
Keep Kerry Out
Kerry is a TRAITOR
Kerry is UNFIT


Steve Christensen

[blue9t3]

Your giving them to much credit, they are much simpler than that.
Kerry has "good" hair and hes not W.


You cant always get what you want
_________________
MOPAR-BUYER

[RStauch]

[stevec]

Then is a perfect setup. Dump Kerry and have Hilary as the replacement.
She's the only viable candidate that could, and with little time to expose her, as we know what she really is.
She said that she wouldn't run, but if it's made to appear that she's doing it for the good of the party and country. She could slip in. It does make one wonder. I was flipping thru the channels last night and she was on [I believe] MSNBC, she looked like she was waiting [biding her time] with her answers to Tim Russert.
_________________
Keep Kerry Out
Kerry is a TRAITOR
Kerry is UNFIT


Steve Christensen

[sore loser]

[sore loser]