For Those Of You That Contradicted And Critized Me

[FredF]

When I said that Kerry still had not released all his military records and you were so inssitant that he had

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewSpecialReports...E20040916a.html

 

[NWA/AMT]

Put the martyr complex away, Fred. Despite this latest attempt by the Bush campaign to imply otherwise, Kerry has still been far more forthcoming and forthright about his military service than Bush.

 

[ITRADE]

You're relying on CBS news?

"The Bush memos were authentic; our experts said so."

"We didn't rely on every expert, but they're authentic."

"For every expert that thinks they're false, there is expert that feels otherwise."

"There is now strong suspicion that the documents are fakes."

Ohhh.....

 

[KCFlyer]

When I said that Kerry still had not released all his military records and you were so inssitant that he had

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewSpecialReports...E20040916a.html

[post="181335"][/post]​

Fred...with all due respect, the 'facts' you are citinig are coming from a website that is tilted a bit to the right, judging from the "fact-o-rama" archives.

And you know something, here's what I'd like to see - a mano-a-mano debate between Bush and Kerry...no prepackaged questions...no questions about anything that has happened more than 8 years ago (fair enough? that means the Bushies get 4 years of Clinton to blame)...only questions that involve the ISSUES at hand, not military service, not divorces, not drug use, nothing but the issues. Let the "panel" ask questions that deal only with issues. One debate - just like Bush wants. They can debate the impact of the policies of George Bush. But they cannot debate the military service, past substance abuse problems or divorces of either candidate. They can debate their stance on medical care, they can debate the plans for social security. They can debate foreign policy. They can debate the war. They can debate Bush's record. You know...things to substantiate claims made about the other (Kerry wants to nationalize health care...Bush wants to bankrupt the country). Let each candidate put forth an argument for what THEY would do...not what they claim the other would do.

Elections are supposed to be about "issues", but more and more they have become like the O J Simpson trial...you remember...the issue in that was whether or not OJ killed his wife, but it was redirected to whether or not Dennis Furhman said the N word. Same thing here...instead of focusing on issues facing this country, we dwell on whether or not John Kerry shed enough blood to warrant a purple heart.

 

[FredF]

Sorry KC, but you are just wrong again.

The "facts" cited come directly from the "US NAVY" in response to a FOI Request. It is not opinion, it is not op ed, it is exactly what I said before, Kerry has not released or allowed to be released ALL of his military records while the form mentioned in the article,

HAS been signed and authorized by BUSH.

While I may not like the way things turn our sometimes, I will at least acknowledge facts when they are presented.

Your turn.

 

[FredF]

Put the martyr complex away, Fred. Despite this latest attempt by the Bush campaign to imply otherwise, Kerry has still been far more forthcoming and forthright about his military service than Bush.

[post="181394"][/post]​

Then Pray tell explain how he was awarded a decoration that does not exist?

 

[KCFlyer]

Sorry KC, but you are just wrong again.

The "facts" cited come directly from the "US NAVY" in response to a FOI Request. It is not opinion, it is not op ed, it is exactly what I said before, Kerry has not released or allowed to be released ALL of his military records while the form mentioned in the article,

HAS been signed and authorized by BUSH.

While I may not like the way things turn our sometimes, I will at least acknowledge facts when they are presented.

Your turn.

[post="181458"][/post]​

Then I believe that you would accept that it would be good if Bush could be questioned about the Iraq War and it's justification, about his foreign policy, about his plans for Social Security and have him show the impact that it will have on future generations (after current generations who still will get SS payments during their retirement), about his plans for medical care, about the Patriot Act, about his stance on nations that shelter terrorists -specifically Saudi Arabia. And that he would be out there on his own...no teleprompter, no Tricky Dick whispering sweet nothings in his ear. Just him and Kerry.

If we must play the military history of Kerry, then I would suggest that Bush tell us all about his military record. If we won't deal with issues facing my kid's future - then let's let them both face up to past issues that occured when I was a kid.

 

[NWA/AMT]

Then Pray tell explain how he was awarded a decoration that does not exist?

[post="181459"][/post]​

Which award are you attempting to discredit this time, Fred?

If you're talking about the "Silver Star with combat V", you might want to keep in mind that the Silver Star is only awarded for combat heroism and while it is unusual that Kerry's DD214 shows a "Silver Star with combat V", it is highly unlikely that Kerry typed his own DD214 himself.

The Bronze Star, on the other hand, uses the "V" device to denote an award for valor in combat as opposed to an award for meritorious service.

Read more about the "V" device here:

http://www.homeofheroes.com/medals/ribbons/1_devices.html

So some Navy E-1 Clerk/Typist in 1970 didn't know that while the "combat V" device was used on the Bronze Star it was not used on the Silver Star. So what? The boys at the old "Cybercast News Service" are really knocking themselves out on this one.

The point they can't get away from, though, is that Kerry was awarded a Bronze Star, a Silver Star and three Purple Hearts. They weren't awarding those in the Alabama National Guard.

 

[TWAnr]

...a Bronze Star, a Silver Star and three Purple Hearts. They weren't awarding those in the Alabama National Guard.

[post="181580"][/post]​

Especially not to those who never reported for duty.

P.S. Does anyone else find it curious that all of Flintstone's 144 posts, since he registered in July, are in this Forum and that none of his messages appear in any other forum or relate to aviation? He certainly smells like a plant by the RNC or the Shrub's reelection (oops, he never was elected in the first place) campaign.

 

[AgMedallion]

And you know something, here's what I'd like to see - a mano-a-mano debate between Bush and Kerry...no prepackaged questions...no questions about anything that has happened more than 8 years ago (fair enough? that means the Bushies get 4 years of Clinton to blame)...only questions that involve the ISSUES at hand, not military service, not divorces, not drug use, nothing but the issues.

[post="181432"][/post]​

You mean we couldn't hear Kerry's justification for calling Vietnam vets war criminals or his rationale for never apologizing for those remarks? Is that fair to the many veterans who served honorably and resent being lumped into the same category as those tried at Nuremburg? We couldn't question his 20 year Senate record during which he never authored any legislation and voted against virtually all the major weapons systems in use today by our military? Or his failing to show up for many votes (maybe he was busy trying to find a rich wife)? Which positions would he present, the ones where he flipped, then flopped or vice versa?

 

[KCFlyer]

You mean we couldn't hear Kerry's justification for calling Vietnam vets war criminals or his rationale for never apologizing for those remarks? Is that fair to the many veterans who served honorably and resent being lumped into the same category as those tried at Nuremburg? We couldn't question his 20 year Senate record during which he never authored any legislation and voted against virtually all the major weapons systems in use today by our military? Or his failing to show up for many votes (maybe he was busy trying to find a rich wife)? Which positions would he present, the ones where he flipped, then flopped or vice versa?

[post="181734"][/post]​

Yep...that's what I mean. You guys have your opinions on that, you aren't voting for him. For the general public, the ones who don't give a rats ass about what happened 20 to 30 years ago, then yes, I'd like for them to hear about the issues facing us and our children today. What someone did 20-30 years ago doesn't necessarily reflect on what kind of leader they would make. If that were the case, then you are saying that being a cokehead in your past ain't a big deal, just as long as you wield a big stick in "foreign policy" and "find Jesus"?

I'd like to have Kerry ask the American public "Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago". I'd like Bush to respond to the American public about the justification of the war in Iraq, about the screwed up post occupation (oh...I mean LIBERATION) of Iraq.

I'd like to have the American people hear our president tell them that he can't diclose that for "national security" reasons.

I'd like to hear his justification of the USA Patriot act as a deterrent to terrorist threats, and his justification of ripping away our constitutional rights, while our borders have so many holes in them it ain't funny, and while our ports are virtually unprotected.

I'd like to hear how his "clear skies" initiative is clearing the skies for anybody.

I'd like to hear how his environmental policies improve the environment.

I'd like some insight on his plans for social security....how to they intend to pay out to the people who have paid in for 30 to 40 years and don't have an "ownership" stake in their retirement without bankrupting the country for my kid.

I'd like him to give us a few examples on how his health care initiatives have helped to improve the health and welfare of lower class citizens.

I'd like to hear the benefits of his "go it alone" foreign policy.

I'd kind of like to hear what he has to say about why there is such need to keep discussions between him and his staff "confidential" and not share that with the Congress of the United States...you know, the guys who have to vote on them.

All of those things are being ignored because we're apparently still living in 1969. I thought the "Age of Aquarius" had died and gone to heaven. But it's alive and well in "Campaign '04". But if we want to focus on atrocities towards our military, I'd kind of like to know why, if he and his administration admires and respects the men and women who fight (and die, but we don't want to go there), why are they cutting benefits to those people? Why couldn't Bush had taken a little time to pay respects to the soldiers who died in Iraq last Memorial Day? Why are those who are no longer in this world after giving their life in the fight for my freedom (was my freedom really at stake in Iraq...I'd like to understand how) can't get the respect from their Commander in Chief because it might "look bad" to remind the American public that their sons, daughters, brothers and sisters, are dying in a war that many Americans consider questionable.

So yeah...I figure that there are a lot more pressing issues that need to be discussed that what happened in 1969.

 

[diogenes]

It seems the US Navy says all of kerry's medals have the correct provenance and were properly awarded.

Now, y'all aren't going to question the military, are you? Folks might start thinking you're a Democrat!

 

[USAir757]

P.S. Does anyone else find it curious that all of Flintstone's 144 posts, since he registered in July, are in this Forum and that none of his messages appear in any other forum or relate to aviation? He certainly smells like a plant by the RNC or the Shrub's reelection (oops, he never was elected in the first place) campaign.

A plant? If that's the case, how many people have changed their minds on who they're going to vote for as a result of Fred posting here?

And more, what are you talking about Bush not being elected in the first place? Is there something about our election system that you don't understand? If you read into it, you'll find we've had an electorate system in this country for quite some time... just because it doesn't work in your favor doesn't mean you need to cry and whine about it. It's been four years, deal with it and move on.

 

[NWA/AMT]

It seems the US Navy says all of kerry's medals have the correct provenance and were properly awarded.

Now, y'all aren't going to question the military, are you? Folks might start thinking you're a Democrat!

[post="181790"][/post]​

In case the folks at the 'Cybercast News Service' missed it:

Navy: Kerry medals approved properly

 

[TWAnr]

Is there something about our election system that you don't understand? If you read into it, you'll find we've had an electorate system in this country for quite some time... just because it doesn't work in your favor doesn't mean you need to cry and whine about it. It's been four years, deal with it and move on.

[post="182150"][/post]​

I am qualified to teach Constitutional Law in law schools, so your chidings about not understanding the election system are way off the mark.

Bush was anointed by a Supreme Court split along partisan lines. The decision holding that there was insufficient time to complete a manual recount (in part because the court itself halted that recount pending its decision) was one of the most poorly legally supported and weakest reasoned court opinions in the history of the republic.

Just because four years have passed since Al Gore conceded the election to prevent a constitutional crisis does not legitimize its outcome. If Bush & Co. had a scintilla of common sense, he would have governed from the center, to achieve a national consensus after a disputed election, instead of making a hard turn to the extreme right wing fringe.