Doug

Actually, it describes most on either side of the spectrum who post here.

Tonight, dark. Light tomorrow throughout the day.

Ya know Bung, that is just really fucking special.

Damn! And here I thought that you and I might not agree on the war! I really appreciate the insightfulness you bring to this forum. Good to hear unedited news from the front. I feel like it's a bad choice when we are forced to choose between the lesser of two evils (Bush/Kerry). While I've always believed Bush (or those in his party)had a hidden agenda in Iraq, I'm not sure that Kerry could get us out cleanly.

Yeah, in spite of the fact that Teddy & most of the Kennedys have now sobered up, that particular incident is one for which I don't think anyone should be forgiven. Demographically, when you have spoiled rich kids (Kennedy, bush, et al) who become politicians, you will generally find a few alcohol & drug related skeletons in their closets. Then you have dysfuctional white trash like Clinton! BTW, the one missing piece of evidence from the Chappaquidick crash was related to the force of the crash. Apparently, they hit the water so hard it knocked the panties off of her and into the glove box

Well, I've never seen George W. Bush & Benito Mussolini in the same place at the same time. I guess that proves that W is Mussolini, doesn't it. Kennedy held his liquor better than Bush.

Sad news indeed.

"George Bush is simply too stupid to be President."

With the kidnappings, the French have raised their national terror alert from Run to Hide. THere are only to higher levels of warning - Surrender & Collaborate.

You're on to us! Maybe that's why Bush, Cheney & Ashcroft refused to go fight in a war that they fully supported.....

Protest This! Just drawing a parallel between both anti-war movements. Some protestors in the 60's and 70's spat on and harrassed returning soldiers. Those few are now used to judge the whole lot of anti-war protestors. Today, we're being told if we are against the war, we don't support the troops, which evokes images of the losers mentioned in the paragraph above. Not really a response to anything you've said, just an observation.

Ever since I got in touch with my inner sociopath, feeling bad isn't an issue. The education has helped as well.

That was only a small portion of the anti-war movement during the Vietnam war. What pisses me off obout the current Iraq war is that the neocon "Support the Troops" crowd wants people to believe that if you don't support the war, you don't care about the troops. Rubbish.

tsk tsk. Just because we might disagree with you, or hint at disagreeing with you, we get called names. Grow up. Fact is, I have studied the Vietnam war, and if youread one of my earlier posts you would see that I acknowledged the fact that many wars are based on politics, not sound military strategy. I in no way, shape or form blame any soldier for anything that led to the outcome of the Vietnm war. I do still stand by my position that as long as the president was running that war, we would have never won. If we would have gone to sound military strategy, we could have won.

Would that be compelling (as in irrefutable) evidence or convincing (as in so long as the evidence supports your position its valid)evidence?

Ya know, that's the same opinion many in Seattle had of the majority of WTO Protestors a few years ago. Just looking for an outlet for angst and/or boredom, not really knowing what the fuck they were protesting or rioting about, other than against authority.

Lemme see....We were in Viet Nam to stop the spread of communism. We "lost" the war, Saigon fell, the country did become communist, and we are still a free society. Based on the outcome, that in spite of the fact that Vietnam became a communist country & the U.S.A. is stii a free country, I guess you'd have to say it was a good thing. Problem is that politics, not strategy seem to dictate war. Problem is that our politicians don't realize you can't save your ass and your face at the same time.

Must be the meds he's on

Hey, anyone gonna climb anything tomorrow? Hijaking my own thread.

Hmmm....who's military service did Clinton try to attack?.... You are right though, that list was full of Conservatives. Face it, most of those guys dem or gop did "avoid" military service,

So, we back to deciding which party's agenda will be best for the country? If so, which party represented by a poopiepants preppie has the better platform? I think the conservatives have proven in the last 3 years that they are a bunch of incompetent idiots who believe that god and guns rules overall.

But, Kerry was in Vietnam. He served his country. And, who knows if the stories trying to discredit his and others accounts of his actions while on duty are true or not? You've got about the same number of people supporting Kerry as you do trying to discredit him. Truth or fiction? Who decides? The central fact is HE WAS THERE. Shit, Bush's "service" in the National Guard can't even be verified!

It's easy to attack Moore on the way he tries to get his message across, but buried beneath the juvenile facade is this tidbit: The faction who is questioning the military record of the other facton's party has a candidate who has no appreciable military service. If the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth want assail Kerry because he had the veracity to come back from Vietnam and say that he did not support the U.S. being there, they have every right to do so. But, remember, Shrub, whom the SBVFT support, did his stint far from harms way in Alabama, allegedly. I guess that helped the U.S. cause in Vietnam more than John Kerry, didn't it? Thank goodness no one is making GWB's alcoholism an issue in this campaign. So, does the right wing really take this crap seriously?

As usual from Michael Moore, maybe a little over the top, but at least entertaining. Letter Fire away, neocons!