Cia Agrees With Kerry.

[FredF]

A10 Pilot


Thanks for serving your country.

I wish my eyes has allowed me to fly for the AF.

 

[AgMedallion]

I don't propose to remain idle until it affects me personally, thanks. If you wait until then it's too late.

[post="172132"][/post]​

Ahh, the infamous "slippery slope" illogical argument. Personally, if the government has to know I checked out a Motor Trend magazine from the public library in order to also learn that Muhammed the Terrorist checked out a book on how to make Ricin or homemade bombs, I'm quite alright with that. If I'm in danger of the FBI finding out I googled some info on the average rainfall in Las Vegas in order for them to learn that Muhammed sent an email to an Al Qaeda member in Germany, that's fine with me too. Perhaps you should have more concern for the terrorist's potential victims instead of petty concerns for your privacy. Or do you figure that because you're unlikely to be a victim, the ones who are just had some bad luck?

I would much rather have a President whose concern for our safety overrides the need for French politicians to continue getting kickbacks from the U.N.'s oil for food program or the Russians concern for getting their loans to Saddam to buy military equipment paid in full. Sometimes, you just have to realize that other countries have their own selfish intetrests which no amount of diplomacy or "sensitivity" can overcome.

You also have to realize that those who pay the most in taxes should get the biggest benefits from reductions in taxes. There's a term for doing otherwise. It's called welfare.

 

[delldude]

kerry getting what he deserves for running around boasting about 'nam.
i don't know too many guys who even like to discuss their experience let alone tout it all over the airwaves....
john,what about your voting record...can't you boast about that?
or hows about your peices of major legislation you authored??

 

[KCFlyer]

kerry getting what he deserves for running around boasting about 'nam.
i don't know too many guys who even like to discuss their experience let alone tout it all over the airwaves....
john,what about your voting record...can't you boast about that?
or hows about your peices of major legislation you authored??

[post="173274"][/post]​

YEssir...GWB doesn''t to boast about his Vietnam experiences. You know, when it gets down to the brass tacks, I don't give a rats ass about who did what in Vietnam or who took what drugs back in the 1980's. But the "issues" that we are supposed to vote on are becoming these:

1. Kerry's Vietnam Service
2. Kerry's 18 year old divorce.
3. Terrorism (but carefully overlook the fact that we are no safer today than 3 years ago).

I agree, Kerry should make one final statement about the slime boat liars for Bush, then leave it at that and focus instead on Iraq (which we won't be out of for quite some time), the economy (which is producing jobs that won't support an individual, much less a family). An even better issue might be what steps either could do to "open" the government to the people instead of keeping everything secret in the name of "fighting terrorism". What's come out of those closed door meetings seems to be a bad plan. Perhaps it's time to let the public (you know, the ones who "elected" our president...okay, technically the public elected Gore, but the electoral college elected Bush) see what the executive branch is doing. For that matter, it'd be nice if the Legislative branch might be allowed to see what the executive branch is doing.

 

[KCFlyer]

deleted....looked like the first post didn't take.

 

[AgMedallion]

3. Terrorism (but carefully overlook the fact that we are no safer today than 3 years ago).

How do you figure that? This is clearly a totally subjective and, I might add, biased-towards-Kerry statement.

I agree, Kerry should make one final statement about the slime boat liars for Bush,

They're veterans who were there and earned their right to express their opinion. Who are you to call them liars? Were you there serving in those swift boats? Amazing how each and every one of those vets is a liar. Must have been brainwashing, huh?

Perhaps it's time to let the public (you know, the ones who "elected" our president...okay, technically the public elected Gore, but the electoral college elected Bush)

Not just technically, legally. It's in something called the U.S. Constitution. Try reading it sometime. I'd bet any amount of money that if Gore won on electoral votes, but not popular, you wouldn't be complaining one bit. 😛

 

[KCFlyer]

How do you figure that? This is clearly a totally subjective and, I might add, biased-towards-Kerry statement.

Oh, I dunno. Maybe the pictures of the machine gun toting guard outside a New York subway. Looked more like Beirut than New York. Maybe it's because of those beheadings that happened after the liberation of Iraq. Maybe it was because of the roadside bombings that are managing to kill a few American soldiers every time one goes off.

They're veterans who were there and earned their right to express their opinion. Who are you to call them liars? Were you there serving in those swift boats? Amazing how each and every one of those vets is a liar. Must have been brainwashing, huh?

What about the vets who were there and said that Kerry's version is more accurate? Are they liars? They're verterans...they don't lie...do they? What about the records that seem to disparage the claims of this group...is a vast left wing conspiracy to brainwash those vets?

Not just technically, legally. It's in something called the U.S. Constitution. Try reading it sometime. I'd bet any amount of money that if Gore won on electoral votes, but not popular, you wouldn't be complaining one bit. 😛

Nope. But I'll bet you would be complaining loudly. Actually, I support the Colorado initiative of proportionally dividing the electoral votes based on the popular vote. As much as the framers of the constitution were wise men, the DID write the thing back when things were a lot different. The way it is now, the votes of those voting for the "loser" in a given state are basically worthless. In my state, highly Republican Kansas, Gore got 38% of the popular vote, but under the current system, It doesn't matter...Bush got all 6 of the states electoral votes. If you proportionally divided the electoral votes, Gore would have 2.28 votes...and since I am a "fair" guy, I round to the nearest 1...Gore would have had 2 electoral votes to represent the "true" feelings of Kansans. What's your feelings on that...bear in mind, if it would have been in place in 2000, GWB would be doing something more difficult than he is doing now...spending even MORE time at the Crawford ranch.

 

[JI Guy]

Yeah, the framers also "counted" slaves as 3/5 a man so those guys weren't perfect. I'm just flabbergasted that the slime machine is "gooing" Kerry on Vietnam when GWB, Cheney, Ashcroft AND Wolfowitz didn't set foot there! Goddamn HYPOCRITES!!!!!

 

[FredF]

You guys keep trying to lump the Sfities group in with the Bush campaign and the fact of the matter is that they are NOT connected. As much as the media try to connect them and completely ignore the links between kerry and moveon.org and those other groups.

There is still no proof of any connection.

KC you are bound and determined to ignore the facts that support Bush in what he is doing and saying, yet you seem ready to believe no proof of any links between these groups and Bush.

Why is that?

 

[KCFlyer]

KC you are bound and determined to ignore the facts that support Bush in what he is doing and saying, yet you seem ready to believe no proof of any links between these groups and Bush.

Why is that?

[post="173327"][/post]​

What is Bush doing or saying? All he said is that "I respect John Kerry's service to his country". He stops short of saying that he regrets the swift boat group has run the ads that they have run.

FWIW, I live on the border of a "swing state". One would think that I would be inundated with Moveon.org ads. Fact of the matter is, about all I am seeing here in the KC metro area are Bush ads. Geez...we couldn't even get away from the Bush ads by turning to the sports page, only to find the President, General Manager, CEO and other title du jour of the KC Chiefs slobbering all over himself when Cheney showed up at training camp. Turned on Monday Night football, only to see the real Tricky Dick again...sitting in Lamar Hunt's suite to watch the game. Dang near puked.

As I said, I don't give a rats ass about what somebody did or didn't do in Vietnam. But would you folks howl if MoveOn.org were to start running ads about Bush's inablity to find Alabama in a National Guard fighter jet?

 

[TWAnr]

There is still no proof of any connection.

[post="173327"][/post]​

Is that why the Bush campaign felt compelled to fire two staff members, including their top legal adviser, because they were involved with the Smear Boat Liars for Bush?

 

[FredF]

Get the facts straight, neither were fired, they resigned because they did not want ot become a distraction. In other words, they did the honorable thing.

But here

"Col. Cordier did not inform the campaign of his involvement in the advertisement," the Bush campaign said in a statement late Saturday. "Because of his involvement [in the ad] Col. Cordier will no longer participate as a volunteer for Bush-Cheney '04."



In April the Kerry for President Web site proudly announced: "Zach Exley joins the [Kerry] Internet team as Director of Online Communications and Online Organizing. He was previously the director of special projects for the MoveOn.org."

And a statement issued by MoveOn when Exley signed on with team Kerry insisted that "federal election rules permit some forms of communication" between Exley and the liberal 527.

I find it very funny that those screaming loudest about a connection that they say is against the law, are very quiet about doing it themselvs. Just another example of the complete and total hypocracy of the Democratic Party.

 

[KCFlyer]

I find it very funny that those screaming loudest about a connection that they say is against the law, are very quiet about doing it themselvs. Just another example of the complete and total hypocracy of the Democratic Party.

[post="173344"][/post]​

I'm not screaming about any connection or not. I think that if an organization, be it "MoveOn.org" or "Republican poop don't stink.org" wants to focus on issues, why don't we focus on some issues that at least occured during this millenium? I don't care what happened 35 years ago. I'd kind of like to be swayed about an issue that actually affected me once I was OUT of high school (1975).

 

[NWA/AMT]

Ahh, the infamous "slippery slope" illogical argument.

[post="173256"][/post]​

No, an example of a 'slippery slope' argument would be saying something like: "If you don't support the President without question, then the terrorists win." My statement was a fairly simple and easy to understand declaration that is easily backed by numerous examples of historical precedent.

Personally, if the government has to know I checked out a Motor Trend magazine from the public library in order to also learn that Muhammed the Terrorist checked out a book on how to make Ricin or homemade bombs, I'm quite alright with that.

Because you're willing to trade a degree of your liberty for an illusion of safety the rest of us should be willing to join you? Do you think that 'Muhammed', or Timothy McVeigh for that matter, are likely to use the public library for their research? Assuming they do, what's to keep them from just copying the information they need from the books without checking them out? Maybe we should just be safe and burn the books.

If I'm in danger of the FBI finding out I googled some info on the average rainfall in Las Vegas in order for them to learn that Muhammed sent an email to an Al Qaeda member in Germany, that's fine with me too.

Are you also comfortable with the DOJ using the authority for 'sneak and peek' searches of your financial records as allowed by Section 215 of the so-called Patriot Act? So far such searches have led to zero terrorist arrests, but since such searches are secret and even those whose information is searched don't have to be told that such a search was conducted, it will only be by accident that you will find out.

Perhaps you should have more concern for the terrorist's potential victims instead of petty concerns for your privacy. Or do you figure that because you're unlikely to be a victim, the ones who are just had some bad luck?

I am? Well, thank you for that information. As for my 'petty concerns', in case you've forgotten, our forefathers had a 'petty concern' for such things as well; they called it tyrrany and tried to prevent it like this:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I don't believe that it is necessary to trade that for some illusion of security and I don't believe it is necessary to lie to or keep secrets from the American people for their safety. Neither did another Republican:

"I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crises. The great point is to bring them the real facts." - Abraham Lincoln

Sometimes, you just have to realize that other countries have their own selfish intetrests which no amount of diplomacy or "sensitivity" can overcome.

Sometimes you just have to realize that the reason you are acting unilaterally is because everyone else knows you're wrong. (Don't bother mentioning the 'Coalition of the Willing for a Buck') Before you get to worked up about those who were dealing with Iraq under the 'oil for food' program, you might want to know that one of Iraq's largest creditors under that program was Dick Cheney's Halliburton. Did Rush forget to mention that?

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanct...01/0627chen.htm

You also have to realize that those who pay the most in taxes should get the biggest benefits from reductions in taxes.

Hopefully after Kerry wins then the middle class, who, after deductions, pay the largest percentage of their income in taxes, will. Bush has already proven that it won't happen on his watch.

There's a term for doing otherwise. It's called welfare.

Which is only allowed for Corporate America? How far the Republicans have fallen:

"The purpose of government is to provide for the people those things which they cannot provide for themselves" - Abraham Lincoln

 

[diogenes]

You also have to realize that those who pay the most in taxes should get the biggest benefits from reductions in taxes. There's a term for doing otherwise. It's called welfare.

[post="173256"][/post]​

Howsabout when a corporation gets a Bermuda mailbox, and pays zero taxes? Would the term for that be treason?

And should they forfeit the right to lobby the government, and make political contributions, the funding of which is not authorized by the shareholders?