Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I've heard Bush's detractors bring up his military service MUCH MORE than I've heard GWB bring it up. I agree with gotterdamerung; Kerry is making his service a huge issue, so let's break it down and take a good hard look at how he DID serve. He's opening that can of worms, so he's asking to have it tipped over and rifled through.

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Posted
I've heard Bush's detractors bring up his military service MUCH MORE than I've heard GWB bring it up.

Flying a Fighter Jet onto an Aircraft Carrier to announce the end of the war, with everyone cooing over how "he was a fighter pilot", to announce the end of hostilities isn't a big deal?

Posted

CJ - GWB WAS a fighter pilot. That was his classification and job in the Air Guard. From what I've heard, it's not an easy job. Now, whether he was a fighter pilot who saw combat or not is another issue (and we know he didn't).

Posted

Whether Bush actually SERVED or not is the real issue. Served his nose? Yes. Served his country? No. His enlistment in the Guard was an obvious dodge of Vietnam.

 

In the grand scheme of his presidency this issue holds little importance to me in comparison to his deceit concerning Iraq.

Posted

Thanks CJ, exactly what i was gonna say. Rob, if you think Bush isn't guilty of trumpeting himself as "serving his country" you must be turning your head away.

 

Josh, you must not have read what I said: I don't like what Bush has done in his first term. Iraq has been a disaster. I'm admittedly not a rabid environmentalist and I'm a business owner, but even I am offended by the lack of thought in his environmental positions. Don't even get me started on his wrong-headed Christian-fundamentalist favoritism or avoidance of the impending healthcare disaster.

 

All that is beside the point, however, in assessing who Kerry really is. And Kerry is trumpeting that he's a war hero. It looks to me like his real teammates at that time say he was far from being a war hero.

 

Those of you who are so committed to Kerry that you cannot think a centrist thought can continue to believe I'm one of the "Bush lovers" if you want to. Fact is, I'm not. As an independent, I'm saying that it appears to me that in light of this issue Kerry is showing us that he may be a deeply flawed candidate.

Posted

So Kerry isn't all he portrays himself to be. Is there anyone who things that Kerry is a paragon of virtue? Have any of our presidents ever been paragon's of virtue? Some of our best most productive and noteworty presidents have been deeply flawed individuals. The fundamental question should be can he do a better job running the country domestically, and shaping our foreign policy?

 

 

and on a bit of thread drift, has anyone else noticed that none of the ancient, conservative supreme court justices are retiring, when a republican president is in office and they can be fairly sure they'll be replaced by another conservative?

Posted

The only thing more depressing than the choice of the two tickets to me, is trying to think of who in American politics today would make a good candidate. At least if Sharpton were on Kerry's ticket, we could be assured of some good soundbytes.

Posted
CJ - GWB WAS a fighter pilot. That was his classification and job in the Air Guard. From what I've heard, it's not an easy job. Now, whether he was a fighter pilot who saw combat or not is another issue (and we know he didn't).

He was classified as a Fighter Pilot. Kerry won a bunch of medals. If your going to cap on Kerry for the quality of his medals, why can't I cap on W for the quality of his being a fighter pilot? Not bothering to show up for a physical (we know that - whether he showed up for service, we don't) is lame. As are the other aspects of W's service.

Posted

Trueness. But his pilot status does tell you that he must've spent 6 months in OCS and a yr and a half training to get the status, right?

 

But my point is that critical analysis isn't about jumping to "lesser of evils" as an answer, or a contrast of the two candidates' war performance. Only Kerry is pitching himself as war hero. So what's the real story on that? After some buddies fed me info, I searched for more on my own and was taken aback by what Kerry's COs said.

Posted
Only Kerry is pitching himself as war hero. So what's the real story on that? After some buddies fed me info, I searched for more on my own and was taken aback by what Kerry's COs said.

 

So where are the links you found?

 

Politicians saying one thing (and the media distorting them even further) isn't new. I'm not sure why your so surprised ("no new taxes" "I invented the internet", etc.)

Posted
Only Kerry is pitching himself as war hero. So what's the real story on that?

 

Because it's the only way to counter the right's spin that "Dems are weak on defense" while simulatenously questioning Bush's use of force and his service (or lack thereof).

 

I have also read the criticisms of Kerry's COs. IMO, the evidence is a wash...COs say he sucked, most of his crew says he was great. Here is a decent link to the story:

 

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/kerry/articles/2004/05/05/kerrys_commanders_speak_out_against_him/

Posted

RobBob, I realize your stance on Bush. That is cool, it's not what I am aruging. I am just wondering what specifically that you are seeing about Kerry that bothers you so? And if it is bad stuff, is it definiltey not right wing spin?

 

I have seen plenty of accounts by guys *on* his boat (including two guys who he well may have saved from death) come to his support and call him a hero. I have heard lots of negative things from people that didn't serve immediately under his command. I just want to see what it is that bothers you so much. Obviously Kerry is going to trumpet up his war record, it's a political race. Bush is up there trumpeting his record on terrorism, which is a hellavu lot more suspect than kerry's war record.

Posted

 

Grung-

Your beginning to remind me of Curtis Lemay - to focused on winning the battle to realize your going to loose the war.

 

Cj.

 

I'm not sure I understand this statement. Lemay's B-29's brought Japan to it's knees as he personally ordered the incineration of 67 Japaneese cities and killed over a million combatants and civilians. His actions ( at the behest of FDR ) did, in fact, "win the war"...in The Pacific anyway.

Posted
Cj.

 

I'm not sure I understand this statement. Lemay's B-29's brought Japan to it's knees as he personally ordered the incineration of 67 Japaneese cities and killed over a million combatants and civilians. His actions ( at the behest of FDR ) did, in fact, "win the war"...in The Pacific anyway.

 

Lemay's tenacity and determination won the Pacific. As well as the Berlin Airlift. His chairmainship of the Strategic Air Command struck fear in the heart of Stalin. I was referring to the later Lemay, who thought a Nuclear War with the Soviet Union over Cuba was both "winnable" and rational.

 

We need people like that to carry out a war - we can't afford to let people like that make the decision to go to war.

Posted

Lemay wasn't hindered by the modern media in WWII. Take the press jackals out of the equation and another Lemay would emerge from the ranks to take care of business in places like Falluja...and in a few remote Pakastani villages too.

 

JFK never really took Lemay's 'let's nuke 'em' stand seriously re The Cuban Missile crisis...See "The Fog of War", a stunning documentary on the public life of Robert S Macnamera.

Posted
JFK never really took Lemay's 'let's nuke 'em' stand seriously re The Cuban Missile crisis...See "The Fog of War", a stunning documentary on the public life of Robert S Macnamera.

 

Excellent Movie thumbs_up.gifthumbs_up.gif

 

And we need people with the ability to solve our problems in Faluja, etc. Taking the war to the whole country, and the whole region, subduing them with massive force isn't going to be the solution, IMHO.

Posted

In reality, subduing the Arabs with massive force is the solution. This is what Saddam understood and why he stayed in power for so long. This is what they know and something they comment on frequently. Why is the US so soft on the insurgents? Politics...

Posted
...subduing the Arabs with massive force is the solution...

 

hellno3d.gif

 

Here is my impulsive response to your post:

I know I've said it before, I'll say it again. You really are a shithead.

 

wave.gif

 

But since I've come to believe that you are a SOMEWHAT reasonable person, and upon more consideration: please explain why force is the only solution? Also, please explain why the Iraqi people should obey/respect a US-puppet government imposed upon them by force?

 

Goddamnyername, you seem to have a knack for suckering me into paying attention to these stupid political threads. yellaf.gifthe_finger.gif

 

BTW: I recently heard John Kerry's speech to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about Vietnam in April 1971 where he said, "who can ask a man to be the LAST man to die for a mistake? Who can ask a man to be the LAST man to die in Vietnam?" thumbs_up.gif (that's from my memory, not verbatim).

Posted
I am just wondering what specifically that you are seeing about Kerry that bothers you so?

 

He claims he is going to do something to strenghten the war on terror, yet he doesn't give specifics.

 

He makes pie in the sky predictions about an energy independent United States - which is simply impractical in the short run. He doesn't give a whole lot of specifics about how he's going to accomplish this. Tax credits for more efficient vehicles aren't going to do it.

 

He is simply wrong when it comes to the economy. His rhetoric about outsourcing, protectionist policies, and promoting uncompetitive industries is dangerous. He will distort the competitive process for the gain of a few, at the expense of the rest of us.

 

He will not be a fiscally responsible president. His health care plan will push us right down the slippery slope to socialized programs in the U.S. His plan will cost hundreds of billions of dollars, at the minimum. He will not be able to finance all of his programs by simply, "taxing the rich."

 

He will do more to distort competitive processes and incentives more than he could ever hope to gain with his socialism.

 

He claims he'll improve the security of the country. His plan? Reshuffle some beauracracy in Washington. How is he going to make us safer? He'll somehow "restore respect" to America? I wasn't aware we had lost respect. We are getting cooperation from all of our allies in the war on terror. The fact that France and Germany made a big stink about us going to Iraq has not changed the developed world's interest in preventing terrorism.

 

John Kerry wants people to "judge his record." What record? I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it? I voted for the war in Iraq, but now I'm against it? I am a free trader...Oh wait, no I'm not. Big business is evil....Oh wait, no it isn't, I have the support of 200+ business leaders?

 

I really hope people think about what this guy is going to do for America. If you really think he will get the job done, you should vote for him. I think he is selling America a load of snake oil.

 

A note: I am not a Republican. I have almost the same level of disdain for George W Bush, though not quite as much. I just really hate politicians in general.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...