1 Finish Profile

John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

Locked

Kerry’s finger
“Democratic senator ? and certain presidential nominee ? John F. Kerry, gave the middle finger to a Vietnam veteran at the Vietnam Memorial Wall on Memorial Day morning,” NewsMax.com reported yesterday. “Ted Sampley, a former Green Beret who served two full tours in Vietnam, spotted Kerry and his Secret Service detail at about 9 a.m. Monday morning at the Wall. Sampley walked up to Kerry, extended his hand and said, ‘Senator, I am Ted Sampley, the head of Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry, and I am here to escort you away from the Wall because you do not belong here.’

“At that point, a Secret Service officer told Sampley to back away from Kerry. Sampley moved about 6 feet away and opened his jacket to reveal a HANOI JOHN T-shirt,” NewsMax reported. “Kerry then began talking to a group of schoolchildren. Sampley then showed the T-shirt to the children and said, ‘Kerry does not belong at the Wall because he betrayed the brave soldiers who fought in Vietnam.’

“Just then, Kerry ? in front of the schoolchildren, other visitors and Secret Service agents ? brazenly ‘flashed the bird’ at Sampley and then yelled out to everyone, ‘Sampley is a felon!’

“Kerry was referring to an incident 12 years ago when Sampley confronted Sen. John McCain’s chief aide, Mark Salter, in a Senate stairwell after McCain repeatedly offended POW families at a Senate POW hearing. Sampley, whose father-in-law at that time was MIA in Laos, followed Salter into the stairwell and, when they emerged, Salter had a bloody lip and a broken nose.”

Ah – The Man that Wants to be King – A real American Coward! Hanoi John – He should of Married Jane Fonda…

Topic

For those that want a link

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/31/225546.shtml

Kerry is human

In reply to For those that want a link

If the news report is correct, Kerry was provoked.

Kerry served and was a veteran too. He had every right to be there. He had the right to campaign there without being harassed or assaulted. And again if the new report you link to is correct there is evidence that the gentleman in question has committed agravated assault.

So Kerry reacted in a human way to being insulted and harrassed repeatedly.

Here in Canada, our Prime Minister once choked a protester. Not saying it was the right thing to do, but it was human. And his popularity didn’t suffer. Another Prime Minister told an opposition member to F&%K *ff in the House of Commons, which Hansard recorded as Fuddle Duddle. Again, his popularity didn’t suffer because people recognized that people bait and try to arouse people in the house, and its human nature that sometimes tempers are lost. Again his popularity did not suffer.

If you want to ask me which I think is worse, a drunk driving conviction or flipping someone the finger, I can tell you which one I’d prefer.

James

Be Honest would you say the same thing if Bush did that

In reply to Kerry is human

Be Honest – would you say the same thing if Bush would of done it?

I think not – you wouldn’t say he was human – only liberals are permitted those indescressions – such as BJ’s in the Oval Office – Lieing to Congress – and Backroom deals with China… and Child abuse by the UN in the Congo…

Shoe on the other foot…

In reply to Be Honest would you say the same thing if Bush did that

What would be your stand if Bush had done it?

Honestly – he would lose my respect and vote

In reply to Shoe on the other foot…

Honestly he would lose my respect and vote – that was very immature and childish thing to do. And what gets me is the Liberals will defend him for doing it – Sampley was wrong in attacking him infront of the children as well – should of waited until he was finished …

But that doesn’t excuse Kerry from the Childish and immature act that he did.

I believe Bush has more integrity and would never do something that stupid – but if he had – Loses my vote and my respect..

Yes I would

In reply to Be Honest would you say the same thing if Bush did that

I’ve never in my life voted anything but for the Progressive Conservative party – I didn’t vote for either of those prime ministers I mentioned. And first reaction to the Liberal prime minister who strnagled the protester was – didn’t know he had that big a temper. But after reflection, I remembered someone broke into his house(past the RCMP guard), and he was publicly hit by a cream pie(humiliating).

And if you want to talk indescretions you ommitted Ford pardoning Nixon, Reagun and selling arms to Iran to pay for weapons for Contras in Nicaraugua(and at the same time demonizing Iran, and selling weapons, including BIOLOGICAL AGENTS to Iraq while Iran and Iraq were at war). As to HW Bush, I’m sure while he was at the CIA he had the chance to do alot of things we probably don’t want to know about, and he certainly knew about Reagan’s involvement in Iran Contra and lied about it under oath.

You are so hard on Clinton – do you feel the same about Ike – he had an affair with his war time secretary for years, it was fairly open. Patton the same by the way. We don’t need to go into Kennedy – its on the record. LBJ was involved in vote rigging scandals back in Texas. Do you claim Nixon was a saint?

Lets be honest with one another – power corrupts, and neither republicans or democrats have a monopoly on these kinds of problems.

James

Pot callin gthe kettle black

In reply to Be Honest would you say the same thing if Bush did that

Jim , I really wish you could step outside your body and look in. YOu would see that you discount people for the exact same reasons that you stand for GWB.

GWB is a liar and a cheat, Kerry is a liar and a cheat, but somehow you feel that Deocrats are blind for supporting him no matter what. Well that EXACTLY what you do without any diffrence for GWB. YOU simply REFUSE to accept ANY alternative opinions as they are just Comie lefties, how about researching the accusations OUTSIDE of the white house and Democratic sites and just looking for facts and documentation.

YOu would see GWN no differently than Kerry, a liar, a cheat, a snake and overall bottom feeder politician. THey have got to be the lowest for of creting known to man, yet we let them run our nations.

Whatever, they are all a bunch of knobs that creat SOME good but lots of bad and selfish decisions. Ignore them and let them do thier thing, once they aren’t praised and supported, maybe they will become a little humbler like our PM’s, they aren’t heros, they are held one notch above a 7-11 clerk. Just some goof with a career in the deception of politics. It’s like trying to pick a spy, how can you tell if he’s straight up or not, you could be screwed at any time.

Get them out of the spotlight that they thrive under.

from a VietNam Veteran

In reply to Be Honest would you say the same thing if Bush did that

Rather than get into a useless i-sided debate,I suggest you read the valid and frightening books written by GW Bush’s own staff members after they decided integrity was more important than loyalty to the administration. I’ve come to some very disturbing conclusions about our current President and VP. GW is a liar, a cheat, a phony, and worst of all, a coward (during the Vietnam conflict. Today, he and his administration work in secret, and when their decisions are revealed, they lie and lie and when finally confronted with evidence, they back off and change their story. Never “we were wrong”, never “We’re sorry”. Just more bad leadership.

Interesting – and John tossing his medals

In reply to from a VietNam Veteran

And John tossing his medals – then changing his mind about it – then changing it again – I did – I didn’t – they were the medals – no they were just the ribbons – getting 4 PH’s in 6 months – how many scratches and toe fungus did he have…

Hum – interesting – BS of yours – from a brother vet..

3 PH’s was a ticket outta’ there

In reply to Interesting – and John tossing his medals

.
John Kerry’s commanding officer, at the time, questioned Kerry’s first Purple Heart, which he earned for a wound received just two weeks after arriving in Vietnam.

“He had a little scratch on his forearm, and he was holding a piece of shrapnel,” recalled Kerry’s commanding officer, Lieutenant Commander Grant Hibbard. “People in the office were saying, `I don’t think we got any fire,’ and there is a guy holding a little piece of shrapnel in his palm.” Hibbard said he couldn’t be certain whether Kerry actually came under fire on Dec. 2, 1968, the date in question, and that is why he said he asked Kerry questions about the matter.

But Kerry persisted and, to his own “chagrin,” Hibbard said, he dropped the matter. “I do remember some questions, some correspondence about it,” Hibbard said. “I finally said, `OK, if that’s what happened . . . do whatever you want.’ After that, I don’t know what happened. Obviously, he got it, but I don’t know how.”

……….

More on the matter:

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/kerry_pur_hrts.htm

REMOVE SPACES from the URL

Wow..

In reply to For those that want a link

that IS bad. If only he had only been a cocaine addict or a drunk, that is so much more acceptable in a leader.

Only to a Liberal

In reply to Wow..

Only to a liberal is their leaders permitted to be Druggies and Drunkards … Hum Can We Say the Name KENNEDY! – Hum …. Oh Yea – they are also permitted to be Murderers… Can We Say – KENNEDY!

What about Bush, is he not Republican?

In reply to Only to a Liberal

Failed HIS breathylyzer test, arrested for B&E and theft under while he was young, discharged from the USAF (after MANY request to bail out or take leave to support Daddy’s campaign), has had a cocaine habit.

Republican and it’s OK though?

Really..

In reply to Only to a Liberal

You haven’t read anything about GWB’s drinking and coke problems?? Granted, they were in his past..but so was the flipping the bird thing..

Now now maecuff

In reply to Really..

It isn’t a metter of not HEARING, it’s a matter of not LISTENING.

Some people will ignore ANY report that isn’t from a trusted source. If they don’t trust ANY Democratic sources and only rely on Republican sources what can you expect?

Anything unRepublican is simply a newly found group of ‘Socialst/Commie bastard whining’ .

That’s gonna be MY prty name if I ever get into politics, the Socialists/Commie Bastard party.

Hum…don’t you get it, hum…you should.

Have a great weekend, mrbill got todays Yuk so don’t get on my case. By the way, had any nightmares about spacemen and MEAT!?!?

No, no meat men

In reply to Now now maecuff

However, I did have a nightmare about albino frogs, but I can’t blame you for that, can I?

and another thing..

In reply to Now now maecuff

I could always think of something else to give you shit about. You are an opinionated bastard, aren’t you?

:-)

In reply to and another thing..

I’d like to think so.

Bird was May 31, 2004

In reply to Really..

Try again the bird was just this Memorial Day – Madam – Not in the Past – This week … MAY 31, 2004 – That 2004 …

Okay..

In reply to Bird was May 31, 2004

again, how does that compare to a coke habit?????

It doesn’t

In reply to Okay..

Actually it is MUCH cheaper to flip someone the bird.

Leave it to a Liberal

In reply to Okay..

Leave it to a liberal to defend someone so blindly – then say that conservative do it for Bush – They did it when Clinton was getting his Blow jobs in the Oval office – and said never had sexual relations with that woman – So BJ’s are sex – he isn’t a womenizer –

Kerry – doesn’t have a problem with anger management – just flipping off someone – you liberals take the cake. You say one thing against the Conservative right – and do the exact thing on the left – but thats ok…

The Blind will never See I guess – You are a prime example of What Oz calls – Blindly Following A Leader – Kerry did nothing wrong…
And if we are talking in the past what about Kerrys admitted abuses he did in the Nam – Touched Villages – Kill Civilians – Free fire zones … Hum – Oh thats right he was ordered to do it … and didnt have the Balls or backbone to disobey the orders… Weakling – didn’t we kick sand in their faces on the beaches ..

At least he fought

In reply to Okay..

For someone such as yourself who feels anyone who hasn’t been to Nam is a pussy, well you are on the wrong side of the fence. YOu were one of the first to explain that soldiers do what soldiers do and that’s part of war, when defending the Iraq prison issue, now you turn coat and slam someone for the exact same actions you have considered normal before.

Just like your all of a sudden claiming that Bush isn’t the greatest choice but the best of the worst, what a two faced turn coat of a traitor you are. Or are you simply sliding under the ropes now as the truth about Bush surfaces and you realize your suport isn’t so popular or trendy anymore?

Stick to your convictions Jim, we already have the chameleon name taken on TR,

A quote

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

In 1918, Theodore Roosevelt said, “To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President,
right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally
treasonable to the American public.”

So It would be OK in your book to

In reply to A quote

So in front of kids it was OK and a proper response to Flip Off a person… Right that was a correct move – so in front of your 5 year old daughter I could flip someone off and you wouldn’t get mad…You’re a pretty cool dad..

Gee I guess when Kerry get into an argument with the Queen he can just Flip her off – or with the Shaw of Saddan flip him off… Thats a pretty good come back ..

Oh Hell I keep forgetting that a Liberal Can Never do wrong – Stupid Me … Thats right Hanoi John and Hanoi Jane are Liberals and the rest of the Liberal World closes their Eyes – Blow Jobs in the White House were OK – Lieing to Congress was OK – Cheating on your Wife was OK – BJ’s aren’t sex – and we don’t understand what IS means..

Yea – Liberals – They are Toooooo Coool can’t do anything wrong –

Actually..

In reply to So It would be OK in your book to

I don’t have a daughter, I have a son, and I’m not his dad, I’m his cool mom. As far as someone getting flipped off in front of my son.. he’s pretty cool at accepting that people have faults and isn’t horribly traumitized by it.

What was more wrong

In reply to Actually..

Having someone verbally assualt and harass you in front of a group of school kids, interrupting a discussion between the kids and Kerry, or having Kerry get fed up and flip him the finger.

If Kerry had let this jerk continue, I would have thought he was weak and spineless. I am not saying he had to flip him the bird, but to do nothing would have not been right either.

James

I am not saying do nothing

In reply to What was more wrong

I didn’t say do nothing – It was the immature thing that he did – he could of acted like a mature person – asking the gentalman to depart or wait until he was finished with the children. Then take care of business..

I am saying what he did was Immature – and shows no Leadership skills what-so-ever… No wonder he did free fireing in the Nam … he didn’t know how to maturely handle a problem…

Sampley was wrong also – but Kerry is the one running as the leader of the free world – Kerry is the one that should of showed maturity and not acted out so childishly … but Liberals see nothing wrong with what he did… I can just see someone pissing him off if he is elected – and pushing the button and dropping a nuke…

????????

In reply to I am not saying do nothing

Can you really make THAT stretch? Flipping someone off does not mean they’d drop a bomb. That is truly one of the more ludicrous statements you’ve made. Hell, I’d flip you off, but that doesn’t mean I’d shoot you.

It shows how he handles

In reply to ????????

It shows his maturity – doesn’t it … it shows how he would handle a stressful event – doesn’t it… Lets see he couldn’t get Sampley to shut up – rather than being mature about the event – and asking Sampley to give him a minute with the children – then they can discuss his problem – nope … Flippem Off – Snap – No brain power used there.

But just to lose control and lash out – that shows me the man can not control his emotions or temper (this wasn’t the firsttime he did something like this), just Zip and act.

Wake Up – Liberals – You say us conseratives / liberatians have blinders on – but look who isn’t seeing the forest through the trees…

We know what Bush is about – the problem is Kerry is worse than Bush… we have call Bush on his mistakes – we have critized the administration – did the liberal ever call Clinton to task for womenizing – lieing to congress – shutting down the economy.

And speaking of the Economy, it’s growing at 5% per year estimated rate – 240,000 news jobs create in May for a total this year of 1.2 million new jobs – unemployement down to less then 5.5% (best in 20 years) …

But who doesn’t see that – Liberals… We have our eyes WIDE Open – But what do you do with something Kerry does – Oh thats ok at lease he isn’t a drunkar or drugie .. Na you all have enough of them already in office… You had two womenizer in the white house (JFK and Clinto) – but thats OK .. BJ’s aren’t sex anymore – THANKS BILL – I’ve said that to the wife and she doesn’t believe me – its not sex – according to Wild Willie Clinton..

So we have our Eye’s wide Open – not like the Liberals of America that are walking around with Eyes Wide Shut.

Get some new spots Jim?

In reply to ????????

“we have call Bush on his mistakes – we have critized the administration”

Certainly you are NOT includnig yourself in the WE you are speaking of.

I would like to see one post, prior to today that shows how you have called him on mistakes or criticized the current administration.

I still remember you saying how you would wupport GWB no matter what he did as it is your DUTY to because you voted fdor him and are obligated to support him no matter what.

YOu also have ALWAYS stood steadfast that this is the BEST administration, while knocking ALL other govaernments and parties around the whole world.

Now you agree that he makes all these mistakes but is still the best man of the bunch even with his problems?

Was this like an overnight awakening you had, some distant realization that finally hit home?

Is it possible that nobody supports your favour for Bush now and perhaps you are beginning to see the light and turn against your own faith?

If so, that’s fine, just don’t make it seem as if you have always criticized GWB’s actions or had some form of hidden scrutiny yet believed he was the best of the litter.

Can you say Rockefeller?

In reply to I am not saying do nothing

Hmmmmm,let me see ,I kinda remember Nelson Rockefeller flipping the bird at the Republican National convention in ’76.

I guess it’s OK for Republican candidates ,but not Democrats.

Gimme McCain, he has been through the crucible of war and is a better man for it.

GW is just not convincing me that he is the man for the job.

I’ll Take McCain also

In reply to Can you say Rockefeller?

Just the Liberal media beat him – for not answering question quickly and having a few other problems – Gee I wonder if 5 years of VC treatment would do that to someone.

McCain would have my vote …

leadership..

In reply to I am not saying do nothing

as far as GWB goes, he’s done nothing more than throw a 4 year temper tantrum. Nothing more than a spoiled, petulant child. Please feel free to use the dictionary if you don’t recognize some of these words..

Liberals attack the messager – not the message

In reply to leadership..

Liberls always attack the messager not the message – unless that message is in their favor – if its against them then the attack the messager –

Bring it on – you guys all take the cake – you just will never learn that the majority of America is Conservative – Gee – Fox News has the largest numbers than CNN/CBS/NBC/ABC combined – and Fox is a Conservative News program… Hum – Conservative talk radio – 1 number in a number of markets – Liberal talk radio fails unless backed with government money (NPR)…

OK Attack my dyslexic spelling and grammar – come on liberal attack the messager as you guys and gals always do. losing a debate attack the person you are debating…

not winning or losing..

In reply to leadership..

You are amazing. How can you possibly be critical over anyone capping on you for anything. I’ve seen more name calling from you than anyone else here. Have you spoken to your doctor about lithium?

I wouldn’t even attempt to win or lose. You are the most narrow minded, hate filled person I’ve seen here. I envision you with your hands over your ears and humming. You will not listen to or consider ANYTHING other than your own pathetic narrow views.

Jim are you a Liberal then?

In reply to leadership..

The most common post from you is to either call people Socialists, Commies, LIberals, Democrats and lefties before discounting thier post.

“nice leftie site”
Shows that you do not credit the site at all because it is left wing.

As I said before Jim, if you keep teetering on the fence you will slip and get a picket up the bum.

It works both ways, in which case it is not relevant. Your discounting sources due to the political side they represent is NO different than someone else doing the same. If everyone felt the same, you’d only have one party and would live under a dictatorship, learn to accept or at least listen to both sides or else you ARE blindly following one side.

Jim

In reply to leadership..

If Conservatives are in the majority, why did Bush lose the popular vote?

Skullz 4 life, right Jim? 😉

Mike

buschman – more on accuracy

In reply to leadership..

.
You said that GWB lost the popular vote. How can that be?

Words mean things, and the Bush attackers are the master violators of word meanings.

How can a person “lose” a contest that was never waged? That’s simply not possible. The presidential election in the USA is not one for the “popular vote”, but rather for states’ electoral votes. Therefore, a contest for the “popular vote” can neither be won or lost. If those were the rules, I’m sure the campaign strategies would be changed accordingly.

But I do agree that not a majority of Americans are conservatives. Neither is the majority liberal. I’d say it’s probably 33.33 percent conservative (and proudly admit it), 23.33 percent are liberal (and play word games to mask their liberalism), 10 percent are proud liberals, and the remaining 33.34 percent are the unaffiliated or independent, or, in many cases, they’re principles might place them in one camp or the other, but they don’t really know it or understand it. All-in-all, however, it’s pretty much a 50-50 country right now, but we (us conservatives) are making progress.

Max

In reply to leadership..

Not to take this anywhere but just an observation.

GWB did NOT say that Americans wre under imminent htreat from WMD, but that’s what everyone thought due to ‘careful word games’.

GWB is a MASTER of careful word games (or whoever writes his speeches) well not a master because he’s not very convincing but many buy into it.

Perhaps you see the other side but not your own in this case.

“…but they don’t really know it or understand it.”
Ever think they just might not give a crap as they disbelieve all sides and all candidates?

Oz – not to take this anywhere either. . . . .

In reply to leadership..

.
But, all too often, there’s a difference between what GWB really says and what people say he says. And if this weren’t an election year, and if the Democrats weren’t so desperate in their quest for power, things might appear a bit differently to many folks.

By the way, why don’t people hold these Democrats accountable for what they say?

And as far as he said, she said, he reported, etc., I think it’s rare to find a person who can truly look past all the political rhetoric they’re bombarded with, and really make up his or her own mind – AND (a very important and) base it all on a core set of values and principles, just letting the chips fall where they may. Elections should not be popularity contests, but that’s what they seem to be.

Be true to one’s principles AND be able to weed out and see past all the political rhetoric. It’s a small group indeed. I would guess less than 5 percent of the electorate. I think I belong in that group. I think a few other people who post messages here could fit into that group, but I don’t believe the majority does. (By the way, Oz, in case you’re wondering, I don’t think you belong in the group, as I don’t think you do either on a consistent basis. But I’m sure you’ll disagree.)

And on the uninterested, uninformed, or whatever it is I said, that last one-third category is all the rest of the voters, including, as you suggested, people who just don’t care, and/or those who vote based on the 30 second ads, and/or those who vote for the best looking, and/or those who want to “fit-in”, and/or those who………..you get the idea.

Concur

In reply to leadership..

Well Max, for once I must agree with you somewhat.
First of all I will not deny you saying I fit that group as I personally have very little political interest, it is more of an interest in why people support these candidates that seem to myself and many others as completely unprofessional leaders with inly thier own best intentions in mind, especially when it is plastered on our TV’s day in and day out.

I won’t admit to being completely one sided as before becoming interested in GWB’s Iraq actions, I couldn’t even tell you if he was a Republican or Democrat, therefore I am open to both sides. With the current administration, I am SURE I don’t support Repubilcan views in this particular case, but as you have pointed out before, I do have some agreement with other Republican interests but that is irrelevant when the only Republican, or world news for that matter, is focused on something I do not think was justified, yada yada you know the rest.

If I was in America and needed to cast MY ballot, you can be sure that I would carefully weigh each side against each other and see who supports my feelings and beliefs VERY carefully.

As a rule I don’t pick sides, it never works, I have never said I prefer Democrats to Republicans but from what I HAVE seen and heard, I wouldn’t vote for the current administration as it opposes most of my personal beliefs.

I am the type of person who can have two good friends fall out with each other and I will still remain a friend to both until given a reason not to. I will not take sides and won’t have someone tell me who is wrong or right, I am pretty strong in my convictions as you must know by now and simply choose to make up my own mind.

Have good day sir,
OM

It was quite nice of him

In reply to What was more wrong

Personally I would have got up and knocked his teeth down his throat.

Finger was a nice quiet gesture.

Funny

In reply to Actually..

My son would have flipped off Bush, whould they have kicked him out of school for expresing himself then?

I hate Bush

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

That doesn’t mean I like Kerry though, you guys are in a pretty sad position having to choose from an idiot or a fool, I certainly don’t envy American voters, how can you make a good decision on this one?

As everyone knows, I don’t like, trust or believe GWB, he is a liar that gets away with it for some stupid reason.

As for Kerry, well I haven’t paid TOO much attantion but from what I have seen his colors aren’t too bright either.

Well getting rid of Bush would be the first step, you can’t really do worse but it is possible you may get slightly better who knows. Kerry certainly couldn’t harm your country’s reputation at this point though, so what do you have to lose?

We Know

In reply to I hate Bush

We know you hate Bush – and so do thousands of others – but we are scared to hell of Kerry..

What happens if someone pisses him off and he was elected – does he act out childishly and rather than the finger – drop a NUKE..

Didn’t you already say that once?

In reply to We Know

I’m still surprised. And as far as a person being a trigger happy cowboy..aren’t we already dealing with that???

Me too

In reply to I hate Bush

I despise the liar in the whitehouse, and the damage he had done to MY country. He is incompetent, a liar, and only has his personal agenda (with a dose of revenge for daddy) in his heart. His mismanagement of this war is outrageous. In the business world he would have been fired a long time ago for failure to perform his tasks with any competency.

I will vote AGAINST Bush, and I will not throw my vote away.

Actually he has failed miserably in the business world.

In reply to Me too

HE let one oil company fail, then another where investors were ruined and then was appointed to the board of yet another oil company before bailing out and buying inoto the Texas Rangers.

His track record for business AND world affairs is a big goose egg. If it wasn’t for his family name, he’d be pushing for Welfare as he fails constantly, he’s failed sobriety tests, he’s failed in his assumptions about Iraq, he’s failed at stopping Al-Qaeda, he’s failed in the USAF, he’s failed, he’s failed at making you safer, he’s failed at keeping allies as friendly country’s and not just country’s that despise America, he’s failed, failed at everything except keeping family friends on his side, which are also some of the biggest influences in America. GWB is an utter and complete failure, it’s time to elect him president again? Or NOT.

If he had a brain he’d pull it out and sell it.

Six of one /Half a dozen of the other

In reply to Me too

“He is incompetent, a liar, and only has his personal agenda.” For the most part you could say the same thing about Kerry. The sad thing is that we only have a choice between these two lying morons. You can hate Bush but Kerry aint the answer.

You can hate Bush but Kerry aint the answer

In reply to Six of one /Half a dozen of the other

Very true, and the same can be said about almost any politician in any country.

You have given Bush a chance to proove he’s useless to you and can wage war.

Give someone else a chance to screw up, we need some new fodder here for the next four years of slagging.

Anyone BUT Bush

In reply to You can hate Bush but Kerry aint the answer

By now I can be certain that just about anyone can be a better president than Bush. Maybe we can even just go to a street and randomly pick someone. I know Kerry is not Mr. Perfect, but he seems to at least have some of the common sense that Bush lacks.

Pick Jack Daniels

In reply to Anyone BUT Bush

He’s gotta have some immediate family around, then perhaps he can invade someoe so we can buy cheaper whiskey worldwide!

Or RJR MacDonald (there’s a good Pres for ya!)

Better to choose whoever is less worse

In reply to I hate Bush

I didn’t like Bush long before he was a presidential candidate. It all began when he was governor of Texas. Among other things, he actually supported a nuclear wasteland very close to south border of the state with Mexico. This was an obvious treaty violation, in terms of the proximity in which he could do such a thing, and of course there was the health concern with all the neighbor communities. Only a strong opposition from officials and protestors on both sides of the border stopped him, but he was close on making a reality. When I found out he became a presidential candidate I was shocked, especially when was elected. How can somebody that can’t even comply with a simple treaty run a country correctly?

Ever since he became president things have gone big time wrong:

1) First his tax cuts cleared out the surplus; countless jobs were lost, and set red figures all over the place. Now don’t get me wrong. I do think tax cuts are good–as long as you can afford them. If doesn’t hurt anyone, do it.

2) He then spent a fortune on some sort of missile defense system that nobody seems to be using.

3) 9/11 came in. His reaction and speech (not to mention the aid to 9/11 victims) was a big yawn.

4) He said he going to capture Osama Bin Laden. We haven’t even seen the shadow of him. His speech after the shuttle tragedy was a big yawn.

5) Okay, never mind Bin Laden, lets go after Saddam Hussein. Lets accuse him of having weapons of mass destruction. We don’t have enough evidence to get international support, but what the heck, lets try it anyway.

6) Oops! No WOMD here. The country is now seen as big liar and a bully. No problem. Lets change the excuse to make a free Iraq.

7) Ouch! That turned out to be a lot harder than we thought. People from both Iraq and the U.S. are dying every day and the prisoner abuse scandals by U.S. soldiers only make matters worse. Back home, gas prices go up and it still not easy to get a good job that I would under the Clinton administration.

The list could go on for quite a while, and by now I wouldn’t. And in my opinion, George W. Bush sure qualifies to be in the Top 10 worse president in the history of the U.S.

So as you can see…

In reply to Better to choose whoever is less worse

So as you can see, Bush is such a liability that I don’t know how can anyone possibly top him. It is said that Kerry has faults of his own, but they don’t nearly as far Bush’s. If Bush goes on as he has been so far he will completely tear the country apart. From the start, I thought John Edwards should have been the official presidential candidate because he has the perspective and criteria that a true president should have, but I consider Kerry to be the next best thing. If Kerry doesn’t make the U.S. any better, he won’t make it any worse either. So in cases where you think either candidate either (which is usually the case), you should go for whoever is less bad.

No offense

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

No offense Jim, but your hypocrisy knows no bounds. I find it difficult that you write some of this drivel with a straight face. Who cares about flickin some a-hole off? I’ve done it, as I?m sure you have too. It’s ironic how many GOPers like Bush because he’s a man of the people, yet when his opponent does an act that is very “of the people” he gets slammed for it. Real people get upset and make mistakes. Your knight in shinning armor (Bush) excels at that. Yet his mistakes have gotten over 700 American soldiers killed. But that doesn’t matter to you, does it? If you honestly believe the BS you are shoveling then I’m sorry you are a lemming. You will blindly follow whatever Rush and the other ultra right propaganda tells you (like that BS about our economy being in the best shape in 20 years). What rock are you living under? Sure there’s a rise in the economy right now, it had no where to go but up!

Look the two party system is flawed. I’m a Dem, even if I’m middle of the road on most of my political views. I also realize that I dislike Bush and might be looking more into his mistakes than his accomplishments. When judging Bush I try and look at where we were when he started and where we are now. I’m sorry Jim, this country has taken a major turn for the worse!

But don’t kid yourself into thinking Kerry is some bad guy because he flicked off someone who probably deserved it. If fingers and blowjobs are the best you can throw at the Dems, then you’re going to get slaughtered in November. Cause I have dead American soldiers and no WMDs(and no, 1 chemical warhead is not an imminent threat) to show for it.

Case closed. Kerry in 04.

Mike

Just a segue

In reply to No offense

I agree with most of your post, I just always smile when I hear GWB referred to as a “man of the people”, it’s almost as blatant a lie as most of the other words that escape his mouth.

GWB,
-Undergraduate degree from ‘Yale University’
-MBA from ‘Harvard’
-Founder of Arbutso Exploration failed and became:
-Spectrum7 again failed and merged with:
-Harken Oil and Gas FAILED bailed out JUST before it’s crash
-Purchased Texas Rangers baseball team

Son of a president, owner of THREE oil companies that ALL failed miserably, owned a professional baseball team, attended Harvard and Yale (lot of good that did him).

And this is just “ONE OF THE GUYS” a man OF the people. This man is so far removed from becoming ONE OF THE PEOPLE I am surprised he even speaks the same tongue (no matter if it is silver).

GWB’s SUCESSFL life is a complete failure. He failed in industry, he has failed in world affairs, he has failed to tell the truth about his alcohol and cocain problems as well as a prior criminal record as a youth for B&E and theft/possession. He has failed ALL his life, if it weren’t for his daddy’s successes he would be in the food bank lineups.

Better reelect him, you have a real winner now.

Failed to make America safer, failed to follow his own ppolicies regarding OFF program, failed to reach a common ground with his allies etc.

BUT, he was SUCCESSFUL at pissing off your enemies more than ever before, bringing America into harms way more than before, BS’ing Americans to believe in him etc.

What a loser, the type of guy you would beat up on the street just for the hell of it as he is an idiot.

Ha, GWB a real down to earth and well grounded, people’s guy!

Whatever.

What a shame for the cause of MIAs

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

It sounds to me that the entire confrontation sprang from flawed logic on Sampley’s part.

If nothing else, Mr Sampley should not have staged his confrontation in front of a group of students.

America is about inclusion, not exclusion.

Every American, regardless of political affiliation or their position on ANY war should visit the Vietnam Memorial.

While I have not been to DC since the Vietnam Memorial opened, I took my family to see the portable wall when it came to our state.

The Wall, the Veterans, the volunteers, all made for a very emotional and moving experience. An experience that none of us can forget.

Visiting the Vietnam and other war memorials is the one thing that should be considered mandatory for every American.

It is a shame that Senator Kerry responded to this incident in a less than Presidential manner.

Still, even just from what is in your post, it sounds to me that Mr. Sampley is a zealot with a personal vendetta against anyone who does not share his point of view.

What a shame. While Mr Sampley will get a few minutes of fame from his stunt, he could achieve much more for his cause by working with our elected Veterans.

Chas

Jim, why are you debating with these people?

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

You are wasting your time and energy, imho. Most of these people that argue with you don’t even live here, they don’t love America, they don’t like American power and her status in the world (yes we are a hyperpower and we won’t apologize for our standing), they have a very negative attitude about America (meaning they always look at the bottle as half empty when it comes to American policy and her decisions, Yes we are sometimes wrong, but atleast we try our best, when was the last time ANY country tried to instill democracy and freedom in other countries?? “America tried 16x, succeeded 4x” according to one quote, now show me other countries that even tried 16x??), very hypocritical (its ok for other countries to protect their interests, but America isn’t allowed to protect hers) with their statements, and plain jealous of our lifestyle and our success.

Forget it JIM, they are a bunch of A**holes. Plain and simple, they won’t ever understand how we think and act, won’t ever understand our optimism and our hope the rest of humanity can have the same opportunities as us, our love for life and all its joys, our fears and a shattered sense of security since 9/11.

They fall back to the dark human side when it comes to America, they want us to fail in whatever we do, they want us to fall from #1, they don’t want anyone to be better than them, so either we join them or we fall, thats their opinion of how America should behave. A basic Socialist/Communist attitude. Are all people from all countries like that?? No, absolutely not, but sadly a majority of them are. I noticed this in Europe mostly cause they don’t get it and don’t want to accept the fact that the power shifted. Its not in Europe anymore that things are happening, its in America (technically it was always America where things were being discovered, manufactered, invented etc). Just like post Renaissance (after the new world was discovered) power shifted from Florence and Venice to the west to England, France, Spain, Portugal, etc.., Now post WWII and coldwar these people don’t get it.

Will our power shift? Absolutely, most likely to India, China, and South American countries (and hopefully to Russia), but Europe is dead. Screw these people Jim, they are the last remenants of a dying civilization called Europe, who is going to be Muslim in 50 years.

all I can say is..

In reply to Jim, why are you debating with these people?

You represent the darkest side of humans, you arrogant, violent, war mongering, pathetic person.

And all I can say is…

In reply to all I can say is..

The Marshall Plan, or America’s decision to rebuild Europe and Japan following World War II, was quite new. It went beyond traditional notions of geography and history and embraced a new vision: using free trade and democracy to create a series of interlocking relationships that end war.

In many ways, it birthed history’s first democratic empire. It also exemplified what is great about this country – a democratic ideal, a sprit of greater good. And it worked, not just to make the world safer, but to make it better. I don’t think there can be any argument about this. The success of America in the post war period represents the triumph of democracy and modernity over feudal disunity.

But there has been some interesting hangover from this success. With the rise of America, the global balance of power shifted away from the old European powers. One of the more predictable responses has been an undercurrent of jealousy about the relative strength and position of prominence that the United States enjoys in the world.

President Bush’s invasion of Iraq provided the old European powers with some convenient cover to act out this jealousy. If you listen to the European leaders it often sounds as if they are blaming America for what happened on September 11. They talk less and less about the terrorists, and more and more about America’s relative wealth and wastefulness.

In such a manner, they transform the United States into a Texas-sized target for all the ills of modernity. Cue the sentiments of envy and resentment. The UN responds by lashing out at the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. They do not pass resolutions when an American is decapitated live on the Internet.

If this seems like odd behavior, considering we keep U.S. troops stationed in Europe for their own protection, it is also somewhat predictable. It’s basic scapegoating, a way to claim intellectual and moral superiority over the lone superpower, to identify yourself as part of a resistance, and to provide some psychological linkage to the glory days of the old European empires.

It’s the rhetorical equivalent of asserting your masculine dominance. Anti-Americanism is how France, which has the Gross National Product of Georgia, is able to still occupy a place on the world stage.

We see a similar – albeit more vitriolic – response from non-western countries. As Samuel P. Huntington observed in The Clash of Civilizations: “The underlying problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.”

Often, the leaders of the Arab world capitalize on these feelings of anger and inferiority to distract citizens from their own failed rule. Economic stagnation is blamed on a nexus of crippling political decisions handed down by America. Citizens are told their way of life is under assault. The youth display their loyalty to the state by strapping bombs to their chest and blowing themselves up.

So long as the citizens are kept red of tooth and claw, they have little time to reflect on the mismanagement and oppression of their own leaders. Nor do they push for things like equality or democracy or market privatization or any number of policies that are badly needed in the Arab world.

More shocking is the strain of anti-Americanism that exists here at home. Leftist newspapers and academics seem dedicated to deconstructing America for not being a utopia. They vent the frustrations and problems of modernity at America. They do not hold other countries to this level of scrutiny. Nor do they compare the United States to other countries.

They merely turn their scrutiny inward, as if they were guilty and ashamed for their own affluence. I suppose it is a measure of how good things are in America that its critics chose to focus on the problems of modernity. It is a safe bet that the citizens of Zimbabwe are more worried about whether their children will eat, than on contemplating their own existential angst.

This kind of self loathing and empathy for our attackers is dangerous because it reinforces to the radicals that attacking the US is the best way to win concessions. It is also terribly misguided.

Very simply, we should not feel guilty for being the world’s sole superpower. We should not feel guilty for standing up for ourselves. We should not feel guilty for rooting out groups of people who sit around and plot ways to murder as many Americans as possible. Nor should we feel guilty for having a president who is willing to do something about this.

FYI

In reply to And all I can say is…

there is no credit appearing at the end of this post, as you keep claiming. Perhaps posting the credit would help. The last line appearing is “Nor should we feel guilty for having a president who is willing to do something about this. “

Here ya go

In reply to FYI

Thanks for pointing that out, I didn’t notice that when I posted it. The article appeared on Newsmax.com. It was written by a guy by the name of Armstrong Williams. Here is the link.

http://www.armstrongwilliams.com/ME2/Audiences/default.asp

And more…

In reply to all I can say is..

America sees Europe as excessively inward looking, sometimes dangerously so. Worse, informed Americans see anti-Semitism running rampant in Europe and xenophobic political parties on the march in country after country

Europeans are constantly reminded of all that is wrong with America. But perhaps Europeans should reverse the process: what do Americans think is wrong with Europe?

Above all, Americans see Europe as a continent of self-inflicted stagnation ? and with good reason. Economic growth in the EU was near zero in 2003.

Several countries, most notably Germany and France, seem hobbled by inflexible labour markets and regulations that inhibit dynamism. The European Union?s highly touted ?Lisbon Declaration? of a few years ago, which proclaimed that Europe would become the world?s most competitive region by 2010, appears laughable to Americans, whose productivity gains seem to scale new heights constantly.

America also sees Europe as excessively inward looking, sometimes dangerously so. Worse, informed Americans see anti-Semitism running rampant in Europe and xenophobic political parties on the march in country after country. Not even pacific Scandinavia is exempt from this.

Americans see a total inability by Europe to handle immigration in ways that encourage dynamism and diversity instead of antagonism and higher state spending. This seems all the more puzzling because Americans realise how badly Europe needs new immigrants, given its extremely low fertility rates.

Europe?s perceived attitude towards rogue states and global terrorism only enhances this perception of self-satisfied inwardness. Americans may differ about what policy should have been pursued in Iraq, but they know that their country cannot run from its role as a world leader responsible for developments in North Korea, the Middle East, Pakistan/India, Taiwan, and elsewhere. It is a jungle out there, as Americans say; not every problem and conflict can be handled through the sort of peaceful, drawn-out negotiations that the EU prefers.

Germany and France were against meeting Saddam Hussein with military force, but had no alternative for getting rid of him. ?What was the European answer to the problem of Saddam Hussein?? asked Senator Joe Biden in a panel discussion at the recent Davos forum. Biden is a Democrat and strong critic of President Bush. ?I asked French and German leaders, but never received any credible answer.?

?We are not even ready to forcefully meet conflicts on our own continent,? Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski sighed. Bosnia?s Muslims thank America, not the EU, for their deliverance from slaughter. Europe devotes half as much in financial resources to the military as the US, resulting in one-tenth of America?s military strength, observed Pat Cox, Speaker of the European Parliament.

Americans now see Europe as compounding its military weakness by losing its leading position in science. Two-thirds of Nobel Laureates in the sciences during the last quarter century were Americans; many of the others do or did research at American universities. According to Time magazine, 400,000 European researchers now work in the US. Lack of funding, bureaucracies so complicated that even purchasing a used computer is problematic, hierarchies that hamper the joy of curiosity and creativity: all of these barriers confront European scientists and are responsible for inciting today?s ?brain drain? to America.

Add economics to this recipe as well. Price regulations and other ill-considered features of European policy contribute to the fact that 60 percent of the world?s new drugs are developed in the US, compared to 40 percent only ten years ago.

This sterility and inertia make Europe less and less interesting for Americans. So American eyes are turning elsewhere: to China with its 1.3 billion people and an economy growing at 8-10 percent, year in and year out, and to India, with its 1.1 billion people and 6 percent annual growth.

Indeed, India now has some of the world?s best engineers, IT technicians and medical professionals. India probably encompasses the world?s largest middle class. With new patent laws coming into place, India will have the same attraction for the pharmaceutical industry as it has for IT, providing clinical trials for new drugs at a quarter of the cost of Europe or the US.

While America increases its population somewhat, due to normal reproductive rates and large immigration flows, Europe?s share of the world?s population is approaching a mere 4 percent and seems doomed to growing older as it shrinks even more.

Demographic change in the US is also working to change America?s global orientation. With American immigration dominated by Latin Americans and Asians, the US feels its European heritage less. Similarly, domestic US politics is gravitating to the country?s south and west, regions that look towards Latin America and Asia, not Europe. The fall of the Soviet empire, naturally, reduced Americans? security interest in Europe.

Is this American-eye view of Europe unfair? Perhaps. It is, however, no more unfair than how America is regularly portrayed in Europe?s media these days. But if Americans are critical of Europe, they are also self-critical, far more so than most Europeans.

As a European editor wrote apropos the flow of scientists from Europe to America: ?What?s most sad is that Europeans still believe that their society represents the epitome of civilisation, while the US is on its way to downfall. What if the reality is the reverse?? Every European should contemplate that possibility, at least for a moment, before resuming their current aversion to all things American. ?DT-PS

Hans Bergstr?m, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Gothenburg, was formerly Editor-in-chief of ?Dagens Nyheter,? Sweden?s leading newspaper

I wonder..

In reply to And more…

where did you cut and paste THAT from. Because you strike me as neither intelligent or eloquent enough to write something like that yourself.

No of course not

In reply to I wonder..

I never claimed I did write them, the authors are listen under the articles themselves.

plagerism

In reply to No of course not

You didn’t give the author credit either, leaving myself and others to believe that you tried to pass off that writing as your own. How can we debate a subject with you, when we don’t really know what you think or what YOUR point is.

Mike

*Scratches head*

In reply to plagerism

Dude, look on the bottom of the articles and you will see the authors?? sheesh.

Easy enough

In reply to plagerism

It only takes one or two sentences to understand that an eloquent and logical post not directed at outsider infurity does not come from Garion.

Read the other posts from Garion and you will see what stacks up and what doesn’t.

Garion…

In reply to plagerism

That’s not proper credit. You don’t actually state that it was written by someone else, you just tell some info about the guy who [I assume] DID write it. [and only on one of the posts, not both] Nowhere in the post[s] is there a phrase such as “Written by…” or even just “by…” in a manner that explicitly demonstrates you were borrowing text.

Instead of being so defensive and claiming no wrong-doing, please just correct the issue and post a clarification.

WOW, take off the right wing blinders

In reply to Jim, why are you debating with these people?

Garion,

If you would take the time to take a close look at the origin of most of the peers who post in these forums, you would find very few Europeans spending time on these off-topic discussions.

In order of posting volume you have:

Americans

Australians

Canadians

Many of the Europeans who do post are from the UK.

Despite your belief, I LOVE AMERICA!!!!

Admittedly, I have no respect for our current President.

I also firmly believe that the war against Iraq was a tragic mistake.

The war in Afghanistan was fully justified. After all, the base camps of the terrorist groups were in Afghanistan.
It’s a terrible shame that we pulled troops out of Afghanistan so that we could invade Iraq.
If we had put as much effort into Afghanistan as we have in Iraq, Osama Bin’Laden would be in custody, or dead.
The capture of Osama and his inner circle WOULD be a major blow to terrorism.

Why did Iraq become more important than Afghanistan?

It was not because of any threat posed by Iraq.
Corporate America could not make any money off of Afghanistan. There just is not much of commercial value in Afghanistan. The people are poor, and there is no reason to believe that Afghanistan will be a significant market for western goods anytime soon.

Iraq on the other hand has seaports and natural resources that can be exploited.
With the higher standard of living the people of Iraq have, corporate America has more opportunities to sell to Iraqis.

Like nearly everything with the George W. Bush administration, it’s all about the money.

Chas

Now the morality of the issue

In reply to WOW, take off the right wing blinders

I totally agree with some of your statements. But I have to ask you, what if your company that gives you the job (which I am sure you have earned and work hard at) is directly or indirectly (whether they are a customer of, partnered with, or customer of any company) involved with any company that is doing business in Iraq? Would you quit your job and find a company that has NO business with dealings with Iraq?

What about the Iraqi people? Aren’t they able to buy American products in which they can use?? and which in turn produces revenue back in America?? As far as I see its a win-win situation. What about Iraqis able to work for American companies and maybe have a 401(k), salary and opportunity for their family, education for their kids, a future??

My point is don’t think that what American companies (although I don’t know any company names, if anyone knows any names please list them) are doing in Iraq as necessarily a bad thing. Iraqis able to buy American products and American companies able to sell to them these products benefits both parties involved.

Ends don’t justify the means

In reply to Now the morality of the issue

My secondary point is that the US military should not be used as a tool to aid any company. Especially when moving forces around compromises other missions.

The fact that American companies are now able to do business in Iraq in no way provides any justification for the war.

My primary point is that if we had not weakened our forces in Afghanistan, we most likely would have Osama Bin-Laden and Al-Queda either in custody, or buried.

By invading Iraq and toppling Saddam, we have strengthened the convictions of the terrorists.

Funding and supplies are nice to have. However, what a terrorist leader needs even more is a “holy” cause to stir up the faithful.

Chas

exactly!

In reply to Ends don’t justify the means

Here’s a quote I find interesting:

We live in a wondrous time in which the strong is weak because of his moral scruples and the weak grows strong because of his audacity.

~19th century Prussian statesman Otto von Bismarck.

Al-Queda is looking for a holy war. They are looking to send a handful of deranged and brain washed men to do something that will once again shock the world.

I think our attack on Iraq has only strengthened their resolve, given them more supporters, and made ourselves look more like the tyrants than the victims.

Newsflash to the ultra conservatives. We are not invensable! The US is a country like any other. Regardless of our economic status in the world, we can’t push anyone around we want to. I hate to think of the country I love being thought of as a bully that only picked on Iraq because we could. But that’s exactly how Bush has made us look.

Mike

A good point

In reply to Now the morality of the issue

I actually agree with you point of view to some extent here, it was logical thought.

I have also considered these possibilities and in an ideal world I could believe it.
With the frequency that large corporations use legal protection to exploit such opportunities, it may start with good intention but just like anything else it will become exploited.

These guys rarely play fair at such a global level, certainly many businesses will provide opportunity, but the real players always ruin it for the rest.

Right on

In reply to WOW, take off the right wing blinders

The part about afgan I can see most of the seeds where from there or trained you can say the one in iraq well I think everyone knows what that is about..

Good points

In reply to WOW, take off the right wing blinders

Damn fine points. There is no direct link between 9/11 and Iraq. I’m sure they were not dissappointed by the events, but that anti-American sentiment was shared by many many nations.

So if it weren’t for a personal or underhanded agenda, why was Iraq put on the radar in place of Afganistan? Sure Saddam is a bad man, there’s lot’s of bad men out there. But why Iraq?

It strikes me as nieve to think Bush went in there cause Iraq doesn’t like us. It’s flawed logic and while some Bush supporters want to put blinders on and not deal with the issue. Most level headed American’s are going to call him on it come election time.

Ask yourself, why 700 American soldiers have had to die? No one would question a thing if we stayed focus on Afganistan. But we didn’t and I want to know why.

Mike

You haven’t been following the press now have you

In reply to Good points

They have found links between Saddam Iraq and 911 attacks – so I guess you haven’t been following the press that closely – or your just another blind liberal – not looking at both sides of the street…

Many Reasons

In reply to Good points

.
1. There was indeed a link between Saddam’s Iraq and world-wide terrorism. (And let’s not forget that it was an Iraqi agent who attempted the WTC destruction the first time, in 1993)

2. The UN resolutions passed over the previous 12 years, not to mention UN resolution 1441.

3. The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, passed overwhelmingly by the U.S. Congress and signed by President Clinton.

Why can’t you people understand that the “war on terrorism” knows no borders, and was not/is not limited to Afghanistan – or Afghanistan AND Iraq, for that matter.

And be prepared, this (war on terrorism) is far from over.

Here ya’ go

In reply to Good points

.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31546

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200406030932.asp

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/9/111622.shtml

Fix the links

In reply to Here ya’ go

Your links aren’t working max. Not to mention only one of them seems to be an even remotely reliable source, albeit a very conservative one. But I find you’ll most likely believe anything that is told to you to justify your support of the weakest president I’ve ever known, and arguably of all times. Which is why you even bothered to list links from such places as worldnetdaily and the nationalreview. Score! Bush was right, newsmax just broke the story! :rolleyes:

Mike

On the links – and more

In reply to Fix the links

.
Remove those pesky spaces from the pasted URL.

As to my “sources”, of course if you disagree with something said, you will simply discredit the source, especially if it contradicts your assertion. Moreover, if anyone thinks that National Review is an unreliable source, it only shows that person’s ignorance in such things. The National Review is just as reliable, perhaps even more so, than the New York Times or Washington Post.

And on your comment about my believing anything to justify my support of something or someone, it’s obvious that you don’t know me very well. You haven’t been around TechRepublic long enough to know about the pesky spaces in the pasted URLs; and you haven’t been around long enough to know that my opinions are well researched, that I’m probably one of the most well-read and widely informed participants in these forums, and I’m probably more skeptical, by nature, than even you. I never believe “anything” just to “support” a desired conclusion. That’s called putting the cart before the horse, and I never do that. My opinions are always well researched, well reasoned, and have a basis in a set of core values and principles.

You, on the other hand, seem blinded by the hate and contempt you hold for one person. And that is sad indeed.

By the way, I never agreed that Saddam’s Iraqi regime was responsible for 9-11. The articles I cited, however, do indeed suggest that Saddam was more than just, shall we say, a happy spectator. But regardless of whether or not he was involved directly or indirectly, to a large degree or small, or whatever, the action in Iraq is indeed about the war against world-wide terrorism. After all, as I’ve pointed out on many occasions, Saddam Hussein personally offered $25,000 U.S. dollars to any terrorist (or his family) who killed Americans. Under what category would you put that?

I need more than “suggestion”

In reply to On the links – and more

“Suggestions” are why Bush is having problems right now. “Suggestions” are why I feel bush is a liar. He “suggested” a lot of things were true that the light of day is showing to be false. He “suggested” that Iraq was an immanent threat due to their WMDs, but that’s been proven to be false. He used these assertions as the reasons to go to “WAR”. The man lied to this country and waged war with another. He’s using the fight on terrorism for his own personal agenda. When intelligence told him there was no direct link between 911 and Iraq(as you just confirmed), he told them to look harder.

In fact what was the point of your entire arguement? In my post I said there was “no direct link”, you then come back and say “But regardless of whether or not he was involved directly or indirectly”… I’m sorry Max, but that’s not regardless, that’s the whole point. You need a direct link to justify war!

They just found a terroist cell with Al Queda links in England. Since this is a war on terrorism and that war knows no boundries, shale we now invade England? Where does it stop? Who controls the slippery slope? How many other nations can we piss off before we realize that unilateral action is not always the best course.

Had we stayed in Afghanistan where the proven connection was then none of this would be an issue.

Again, I’m not saying Saddam wasn’t a bad guy or didn’t deserve what he got. But that does not give us the right to play school marm and dissapline every bad child out there. Money or no money. If we could prove he funnelled the money then we should have taken that to the UN and forced them to act. Unfortunately Bush couldn’t politicize himself out of a wet paper bag and war mongering is the easier route. Hell even Colin powell said this war was a bad idea.

My guess is, if Clinton, Gore, or McCain were in office we would still be focued on Afghanistan and it’s surrounding borders. We’d have UN support and probably would have caught Bin laden by now.

Instead we have prison beatings, decapitations, and are trying to support a country that is asking us to leave.

You’re right, I am new. I don’t know you, and don’t know the trick with the links. If I made an incorrect assertion about your political beliefs I apoligize. But I stand by mine. I’ll be more than happy to read your links and try and keep an open mind about the information within.

Mike

buschman – we’ll get nowhere

In reply to On the links – and more

.
But a couple of things you said really sound rather silly. Especially the “suggesting” and “lies” about the WMD issue. That is so old. Man, oh man, this is old. I’ve put that argument to rest well over a dozen times. Must I do it again?

Okay, if you insist.

>>>>>>>>>> Were these people “lying”? <<<<<<<<<< "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998. "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998. "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy. Sept. 27, 2002. "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force ? if necessary ? to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry, Oct. 9, 2002. "As the Chairman has indicated, the situation in Iraq also poses a threat to international peace and security. Once again, Saddam Hussein has halted cooperation with the United Nations Special Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency. Without intrusive inspections, we will not be able to ensure that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs are destroyed in accordance with U.N. Security Council resolutions. Without those inspections, the Iraqi people will continue to suffer as a result of international economic sanctions." - Senator Carl Levin (D) of Michigan, Senator John McCain (R) of Arizona, Senator Joe Lieberman (D) of Connecticut, and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) of Texas >>>>>>>>>> End of Quotes <<<<<<<<<< In conclusion, if President Bush was "lying" or falsely "suggesting", so was everyone in the Clinton administration who briefed the incoming president and his team about Iraq's WMDs. Were Clinton, Gore, McCain, the United Nations, and others "lying" or falsely "suggesting"? No, of course not, and neither was President Bush. ---------- Al Qaeda cells are in more countries than just England. And no, of course we should not invade England. Hell, with that logic, we should invade ourselves since al Qaeda cells are in the USA as well. The difference, however, between England and Iraq is that England, as a nation state, does not sponsor or support world-wide terrorism, like Iraq did under Saddam Hussein........and like Syria does today. And speaking of Syria, I'm sure you heard about the thwarted terrorist attack in Jordan recently, a thwarted attack in which chemical weapons were found - chemical weapons intended to kill upwards of 80,000 people? (Syria, by the way, borders both Iraq and Jordan - interesting, isn't it?) You may play the "what if" game however you like, but if I were to play that game, my guess is that Clinton, Gore, or McCain would STILL have done the same thing in regards to Iraq, as I believe the whole thing was set in motion with the passage of the Iraq Liberation act of 1998. (Do some research and read up on it. My guess is that you've never even heard of it.) You said, "we should have taken that to the UN and forced them to act...." Yea, right. And how would you suggest we "force" the UN to act? This is an especially relevant question when you consider that it's been since proven that the French, the Germans, and the Russians were violating the oil-for-food deals with Iraq, and they were padding their own pockets by taking bribes from Saddam Hussein. I would provide some sources, but you'd probably just consider them unreliable since they, too, contradict what you might like to believe. You suggested that the people of Iraq were asking us (the U.S.) to leave? On what informational source do you base that assumption? I think it's flawed, because from what I've read, a great majority of Iraqis are happy the Americans are there, and are happy the be rid of Saddam. But you believe what you want to believe, and no amount of reason or logic will change your mind. It's simply an exercise in futility to try.

Iraq and Terrorism

In reply to Fix the links

.
If a person believes that Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, did not support or sponsor world-wide terrorism, he must also believe that the moon is made of Swiss cheese.

The U.S. State Department – even under the Clinton administration, listed Iraq as a nation that sponsored or supported world-wide terrorism.

A commonly overlooked tidbit is that America’s war against terrorism is not simply to avenge the acts that occurred on 9-11. Nor is it against only the perpetrators of 9-11. World-wide terrorism is bigger than Osama bin Laden; it’s bigger than al Qaeda; it’s bigger than Afghanistan; and rest assured, it’s bigger than Iraq.

After forty or more years of the United Nations and the whole world, including American administrations of both parties, standing by and doing nothing to combat terrorism, it’s about time someone can finally muster the political courage to do something about it. It’s just too bad we needed to experience 9-11 as a kick in the ass to finally take action.

Who’s next? Syria? Iran? Or perhaps Saudi Arabia????????

This thing is far from over.

Just two thoughts…

In reply to Jim, why are you debating with these people?

…first of all, I and probably many others appreciate the steps you have taken to clean up your language and make you posts more respectful, thoughtful, and mature. I actually read this one, where in the past I have avoided anything with your tagline all together.

Having said that, (referring to your – “now show me another country that has tried 16x”) I am not sure that any country trying to instill their beliefs on another country, whether democracy or communism or catholicism or any of the hundred other “isms” that people go to war about every day – is a good thing. If there were another country with more power, we would resent them using that power to force their way of life down our throats. The only way to have a country embrace democracy is for the people of that country be ready for the long term commitment to change that is required – otherwise the mission is sure to fail. We can’t just decide someone is ready for democracy and make it so. Iraq won’t be a true democracy for years to come, and unfortunately for us, we will need to be there, with our service men & women dying, for a long time to even see a glimmer of the possibility. Anyone if thinks changing the politics of a country is a quick in and out military operation has lost their mind, and anyone who engages in such an operation without a long-term (and by that, I mean ten year) plan of how to handle the country (and the funding of the rebuilding) in the meantime, and without engaging the cooperation of other nations so that we do not bear the brunt of the budget ourselves, nor do we seem like a cowboy just off to jam our beliefs down a country’s throat – well, that person has lost my vote.

Democracy and revolution

In reply to Just two thoughts…

One of my high school history teachers taught me an interesting fact. Most revolutions don’t happen when the people are oppressed. Revolutions happen when people have their expectations raised, and the governors fail to deliver.

Both the French and Russian revolutions were prime examples – both had monarchies which created democratic institutions which created an appetite for reform which did not move fast enough for the masses. The American revolution can be viewed from that perspective as well.

What lesson that can be learned from that is that nation building is a dangerous game. There are frankly alot of parrallels between what the Russians did in Afghanistan and what the US is doing in Iraq. In Afghanistan, the Russians came in to support a communist government, and provided economic aid to build schools(and educate women), roads etc. There were plenty of “modern” Afghans who supported them. But many tribes resisted, supported trained and armed by the CIA. These tribes ranged from moderate to radical fundamentalists. While after the revolution, the moderates seemed to have power, they later lost it to the fundamentalist Taliban, and there were many civil wars between factions.

Iraq is tough to govern as a nation, because it was created by treaty after WWI. Prior to that, it was 3 provinces(Kurds in the North, Sunni in the middle and Shia in the south) ruled for 500 years by the Ottoman Turk empire(as separate provinces). The kurds still want a separate state, and the majority Shia resent the minority Sunni who long dominated power from Baghdad. Of course for the time being, many Sunni and Shia will put aside their animosity to fight the Americans. I wouldn’t expect that to last if the Americans pull out.

You also have Turkey – who has a kurdish population as well, as well as Iran who has a Shia population, both of whom have an interest in making sure things work out their way.

Nation Building is hard, and should not be entered into lightly. Look at what happened in the former Yugoslavia when communism collapsed. The peace accord was ten years ago and its still not totally resolved. Look at what happened when Britain pulled out of its colonies from 49 to the 60s: India, Uganda, Rhodesia(Zimbabwe) and many others had not so peaceful transitions.

I don’t have any quick answers, and I too distrust anyone who does(of any political stripe). I didn’t agree with a unilateral invasion, but its too late now. Now the decision is what to do now that the US is engaged. It will be at least 10 years of consistent effort to ensure that institutions are lasting.

James

www.AWOLbush.com

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

I’m a registered Republican and a 22-year, combat-decorated, disabled veteran who is DAMNED ASHAMED of Bush. You can download W’s disgraceful “Not Observed” performance reports at http://www.AWOLbush.com. Someone has the unmitigated audacity to call Kerry a “coward” and “Hanoi John” and former-POW McCain ‘anti-POW’? This is insane!

I’m not pro-Kerry, I’m anti-Bush–the biggest disgrace ever to occupy the Oval Office (e.g., the only one with a criminal record). W’s anti-freedom (“There ought to be limits to freedom”), a pathological liar (no one died when Clinton lied), anti-democracy (do I need to bring up the judicial coup that negated over half a million votes?) and a domestic enemy of The Constitution (promiscuous flirting with the Religious Wrong). Virtually every word is a lie of some sort; he represents everything that’s wrong in America and holds none of the founding principles or the philosophy of Yeshua of Nazareth to heart.

If you’re not outraged at Bush, you’re not paying attention! One would have to be dumber than W to vote for him; got brains?

BTW: Make sure you’ve paid your dues before you bad-mouth a patriot, sonny boy.

This is what puzzles me about someone like you

In reply to www.AWOLbush.com

You are a combat veteran, a registered Republican, etc… Every democrat administration cuts military budget, while Republicans increase it (Bush administration increased it dramatically), Democrats don’t give a damn about veteran benefits or veterans who are living on welfare, Republican administration (going back to Ronald Reagan have provided funding for Veteran affairs and increased benefits), etc…and I don’t get how you feel Bush is worse than Clinton sheesh.

Quit Blowing Smoke

In reply to This is what puzzles me about someone like you

It was a republican that caused my dads career to end along with many others of that time when they made the major cuts back in the 80’s do some research that was a bad call of judgement. Now because of how much the war has costed talks of cutting more bases you need to read more.

Amen

In reply to www.AWOLbush.com

Well said. Too mant folks don’t loo at the total lack of honesty and integrity in the current administration. Not just “Dubya”, but Chaney, Rumsfeld (and his groupies), and one of the most frightening people in the administration today, Attorney General Ashcroft.
The Republican Party Line seems to be power and control over the public (you and me) good.

About Ted Sampley

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

Some interesting reading about Mr. Sampley:

http://www.miafacts.org/prankster.htm

Thanks

In reply to About Ted Sampley

Thank you for the informative link.

You have confirmed my suspicions.

Chas

Left wing site

In reply to About Ted Sampley

Nice left winger site …

Get over it Jim.

In reply to Left wing site

There is no middle, there is no CORRECT. THere is left which is ALWAYS commie BS in your eyes, or the right, which is simply Republican warmongers when seen from the left.

You have to do more than just simply discount sources as left, we know you only buy right wing reports, why or HOW can you consider Right wing reporting ANY more accurate or truthful than left?

You can’t, you have a right wing bias and will NEVER agree with the left.

Get over it, there’s two sides to ALL stories.

Show be a left wing site that isnt basis

In reply to Get over it Jim.

Show me a left wing site that isn’t baisis in its reporting – that includes CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN – Fox is one of the Balanced and it is considered a right wing site.

Yes there is two sides to every story – but I don’t have to believe the left side of the story until the remove their basis and just report it and let me make up my own mind…

I don’t need either side give me thier op-ed’s about a story – or slanting that story towards their beliefs…

Stop pointing your finger Jim

In reply to Show be a left wing site that isnt basis

Left is biased YES i know and i have said that many times. So is YOUR right side, there is a GREAT bias from BOTH sides, you need to just weigh the stories from both, compare them to other global reports and insetad of accepting either sides extreme opinions just look for the common underlying topic of focus, the truth is in there, but not from EITHER one side. Right is JUST AS BAD as the left.

Talk about someone that doesn’t read posts

In reply to Stop pointing your finger Jim

OZ – Did you read the last paragraph – “I don’t need either side give me thier op-ed’s about a story – or slanting that story towards their beliefs..”

I know both sides are biasis …

Bias

In reply to Talk about someone that doesn’t read posts

Yes there is two sides to every story – but I don’t have to believe the left side of the story until the remove their basis and just report it and let me make up my own mind…

But you read the right side no matter how biased?
That in itself is showing bias.

They are BOTH heavily biased, would you then not read a right wing report unless it was unbiased? If so, how can you possibly read any information from either side?

Politics has become a pissing contest, not an issue of two competent parties with different objectives where you pick the one that suits your beliefs. Nowadays it seems it is one against another not just two opposing views, it is as Max suggested, a popularity contest, for some looks make a difference, not politics.

In such a world with corrupted politics, the ONLY way to make an informed decision is to look at both sides and weigh who is going to serve you best, or at least propose to.

So are you saying…

In reply to Left wing site

Sampley didn’t do any of the things that put people in danger, George Bush didn’t tell people to “Shut up and sit down”, Sampley didn’t punch someone…and so everyone is showing respect, handling their anger well, and all the rest is just falsehood? Or was there another point to labeling the site left wing – it seemed to have been footnoted pretty well… at any rate, it at least seems to display that nobody is a saint – people in glass houses and all that…

Little Eye Opener

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

First off vietnam was another propganda war this saying is not meant to attack the soldiers that where there. I know some of them personally some to this day can;t even talk about things that happened. there was many more than kerry that where against it afterwards because of what it was about. Maybe it’s because they felt no one else should have had to go through this. We got in the middle of someones civil war for what reason. I think you need to take a step back and relize we are all people and war is a ugly thing especially when you feel afterwards you were fighting for no reason. Everyone has the right to protect your country, family , and home. But war is a result of last measure because there is no other way out.

Wasn’t that a democrate war

In reply to Little Eye Opener

Started by Kennedy – esclated by Johnson – hum let me think back to those 365 days there… Hum

If I remember – they called it Johnson’s war – wasn’t he a good Liberal Democrate…

democrat war

In reply to Wasn’t that a democrate war

equal wrong.. Bush’s temper trantrum = the right thing to do? Because he isn’t a democrat? hum. gee.

If this country is at war…

In reply to Wasn’t that a democrate war

…at any time, it is a war. It is not a Democrat or a Republican war, it involves young men and women and their lives, regardless of their political party. Anyone dismissing any war because it is a “Democrat war” or “Republican war” is belittling whatever the cause is that put this nation in the fray to begin with.

Problem is

In reply to John Kerrys true Colors – For American Voters and Bush Haters

that too many lefties and righties always claim the other side is wrong in their beliefs they are so close minded, well the way I see it BOTH are to blame. Both sides are so caught up in their own egos and parisan beliefs, they are close minded to what’s going on with the real issues. They are always looking for an opportunity to slam each other, pretty sickening if you ask me, then they have the balls to say their candiate is all prim and proper, please. Let’s all accept the fact that everyone is human, and stop trying to convince the other side “your” candiate is a better person and is flawless. God help us come November.

[Author]

Replies