| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/05/2004 04:10:11 AM · #76 |
Originally posted by Flash:
bdobe,
1st....I am far from uninformed.
2nd....you can and will support whomever you choose.
3rd....10 out of 10 terrorists still agree. |
Flash, I wish I had not used "uninformed," as it's arrogant. However, I do believe that associating the "loyal opposition" with terrorism is misguided, corrosive and counter-productive; since it closes us (the voters) from listening to those that offer reasonable and strong alternatives to the failed policies of the current administration.
I do not hope that you'll change your mind about whom to vote for come November 2nd. However, please don't associate opposition to Mr. Bush as supporting terrorism -- even in jest. Because it devalues our nation's 200-plus year tradition of respecting the "minority party," and it devalues my -- and many others' -- loyal service to the country we all love.
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 07:25:19 AM · #77 |
The coming election will be test on USA public intelligence. If Bush wins...
And yes, I am doubting the intellect of Bush supporters... ;)
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 07:37:37 AM · #78 |
Originally posted by bdobe:
Flash, I wish I had not used "uninformed," as it's arrogant. However, I do believe that associating the "loyal opposition" with terrorism is misguided, corrosive and counter-productive; since it closes us (the voters) from listening to those that offer reasonable and strong alternatives to the failed policies of the current administration.
I do not hope that you'll change your mind about whom to vote for come November 2nd. However, please don't associate opposition to Mr. Bush as supporting terrorism -- even in jest. Because it devalues our nation's 200-plus year tradition of respecting the "minority party," and it devalues my -- and many others' -- loyal service to the country we all love. |
Well said. |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 07:38:27 AM · #79 |
EddyG,
Why have you not responded again to this thread you started? |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 07:55:38 AM · #80 |
Originally posted by JBjb:
Wow! Are such far-fetched defensive, offensive and make-an-excuse-of- some-kind-remarks typical of most Republicans? It sure seems to be of Bush. Despite the fact that the media owners seem to push for the supposedly conservative viewpoint all the time, Bush come off looking not conservative, but rash and confused most of the time. I'd be one [a Republican...I liked Ike;] if they were what they used to be. Now I hear Kerry standing for what Republicans show they are no longer interested in. I don't think our country can stand four more years of favoritism to the wealthy friends of the oil barrons. When I look at the lack of growth in my and my husband's retirement funds; don't tell me it's the fault of a past administration. "We can do better." |
indeed/agreed |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 08:28:22 AM · #81 |
Originally posted by jonr:
The coming election will be test on USA public intelligence. If Bush wins...
And yes, I am doubting the intellect of Bush supporters... ;) |
Because anyone that doesn't agree with your political opinion lacks intelligence?
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 08:57:54 AM · #82 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by jonr:
The coming election will be test on USA public intelligence. If Bush wins...
And yes, I am doubting the intellect of Bush supporters... ;) |
Because anyone that doesn't agree with your political opinion lacks intelligence? |
Hmm.. that sounds awfully familiar..
Message edited by author 2004-08-05 08:58:26. |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 09:13:05 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by jonr:
The coming election will be test on USA public intelligence. If Bush wins...
And yes, I am doubting the intellect of Bush supporters... ;) |
Because anyone that doesn't agree with your political opinion lacks intelligence? |
Hmm.. that sounds awfully familiar.. |
How so? I don't think I have ever done that, but if I have I'll apologize right now.
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 09:21:21 AM · #84 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by jonr:
The coming election will be test on USA public intelligence. If Bush wins...
And yes, I am doubting the intellect of Bush supporters... ;) |
Because anyone that doesn't agree with your political opinion lacks intelligence? |
Hmm.. that sounds awfully familiar.. |
How so? I don't think I have ever done that, but if I have I'll apologize right now. |
Not necessarily you louddog, but it seems a pattern on these topics to bash the messenger, not the message, and it seems to come more from the conservative/right side. (yes I may catch flack for that comment there but, thatâs what I see. And yes, I know the one in question was bashing Bush supporters this time).
However in that post, he did end with a ;), so it may have just been a bad joke. I know people are getting sensitive to the negative attack comments on here so⦠|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 09:34:37 AM · #85 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Not necessarily you louddog, but it seems a pattern on these topics to bash the messenger, not the message, and it seems to come more from the conservative/right side. (yes I may catch flack for that comment there but, thatâs what I see. And yes, I know the one in question was bashing Bush supporters this time).
However in that post, he did end with a ;), so it may have just been a bad joke. I know people are getting sensitive to the negative attack comments on here so⦠|
Both sides do it equally and both sides are wrong for doing it. There is no need to insult someone just because they disagree with you.
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 09:47:56 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by Flash:
NEW POLL.
10 out of 10 terrorists agree.
Anybody but BUSH. |
I think that is demonstrably exactly wrong.
Here is text from the Yahoo Ireland article, on an actual letter from Alqueda, saying exactly the opposite!!
Two things to note:
1) If you think that this is a bogus letter, or not al queda - the Bush administration has already conceded the veracity of both, and actually tried to use the Spanish bombing to imply the opposite of the content of the letter!! ( ie, if attack occurs on US, then vote Bush (?) )
2) This article was hard to find - much harder than it should have been. Seems the U.S. Yahoo version has disappeared into cyberspace - it is missing. Strange, that...
Purported al Qaeda letter calls truce in Spain
By Opheera McDoom
CAIRO (Reuters) - A group claiming to have links with al Qaeda says it is calling a truce in its Spanish operations to see if the new Madrid government would withdraw its troops from Iraq, a pan-Arab newspaper says.
In a statement sent to the Arabic language daily al-Hayat, the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, which claimed responsibility for the Madrid bombings that killed 201 people, also urged its European units to stop all operations.
"Because of this decision, the leadership has decided to stop all operations within the Spanish territories... until we know the intentions of the new government that has promised to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq," the statement said.
"And we repeat this to all the brigades present in European lands: Stop all operations."
Scepticism has greeted previous claims of responsibility by the group for attacks in Turkey and Iraq. U.S. officials say its links with Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network are unclear.
An unrelated videotape of a man describing himself as al Qaeda's European military spokesman also claimed responsibility for the Madrid bombing, saying it was in retaliation for outgoing Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar's domestically-unpopular support for the U.S.-led Iraq war.
In a shock election result three days after the Madrid bombs, Spain voted in the Socialist party, which has since said it will probably withdraw its troops from Iraq.
"The Spanish people... chose peace by choosing the party that was against the alliance with America," the statement said.
WE WANT BUSH TO WIN
The statement said it supported U.S. President George W. Bush in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry, as it was not possible to find a leader "more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."
In comments addressed to Bush, the group said:
"Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilisation."
"Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected."
The group said its cells were ready for another attack and time was running out for allies of the United States.
"Whose turn is it next? Will it be Japan or America, or Italy, Britain or Oslo or Australia?" the statement said, adding Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were also targets.
The group is named after Muhammed Atef, also known as Abu Hafs, a close bin Laden aide killed in the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan.text |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 09:57:59 AM · #87 |
[quote=EddyG] From this morning's Drudge Report... makes you wonder if all the people who are supporting him because of "the kind of man he is" and his "strong military background" will still feel the same way in light of this:
BOOK CLAIMS KERRY WAR 'FABRICATIONS'
Truly disgusting stuff, from a truly disgusting "source" - the drudge report.
These men, none of whom were actually on duty on the same boat with John Kerry, now are getting paid by Republican smear groups, to tell their useless tales.
Meanwhile, plenty of testimonials from Kerry's actual gunmates and contemporaries is out there for anyone to see. Not to mention the endorsement of literally hundreds of military brass, many if not most actually jumping political party to endorse Kerry for this election.
On the other side?
George W - now a PROVEN AWOL as of last week's analysis of his recoverd payroll slips.
Dick Cheney - 5 deferments during a time of war. What the right likes to call a draft-dodger.
Anybody who brings up this kind of comparison invites the damage it inflicts on the bush-cheney ticket. For trying to impugn the patriotism and integrity of a Bronze Star winner, Eddy, you should be ashamed of yourself. |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 10:05:43 AM · #88 |
| All I can say is... wait 'til you start seeing the commercial on TV... |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 10:12:12 AM · #89 |
The author is pretty blatently partisan. (even if that wasn't stunningly obvious). He is a Vietnam vet, but apparently was never there at the time John Kerry was.
He was initally appointed to attack Kerry by Richard Nixon in the '70s. He's a partner in a law firm with Bush's general counsel 1998-2000, who then worked as Enron's main legal firm, where she worked with Bush's current legal counsel.
Hardly what you could consider an unbiased source, yet you seem occasionally to be so good at checking your sources, Eddy.
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 10:20:24 AM · #90 |
Did I ever state anywhere that this source was "unbiased"? I simply wanted to make others aware of this information, as presented by this source. (Obviously anybody who has enough interest to write a book is going to be biased one way or the other.)
In terms of "attacking" the Drudge Report as the source for information about the book, that fact that it came from the Drudge Report is irrelavent, unless it can be proven that they were somehow involved with the production of the book. The Drudge Report often has stories before other news agencies. But FWIW, USA Today also mentioned the book on Tuesday.
Message edited by author 2004-08-05 10:23:29. |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 10:22:40 AM · #91 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
Did I ever state anywhere that this source was "unbiased"? I simply wanted to make others aware of this information, as presented by this source. (Obviously anybody who has enough interest to write a book is going to be biased one way or the other.) |
Well there's biased in the general sense, then there is working for the law firm that Bush gets his legal advice from.
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 10:23:34 AM · #92 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
The Drudge Report often has stories before other news agencies. |
and more often than not before they even happen to...
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 10:30:20 AM · #93 |
From a European perspective, the funniest part of all the Bush & Kerry bashing is that there seems hardly be any difference between the two, given that they are both right wing compared to most other governments.
Some recent reactions to Kerry from around the world
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 12:00:20 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
Did I ever state anywhere that this source was "unbiased"? I simply wanted to make others aware of this information, as presented by this source. (Obviously anybody who has enough interest to write a book is going to be biased one way or the other.) |
Since your talking about books to read on the subject (and extremely biased and unreliably sourced ones at that), I challenge you to take the "Bush/Kerry amazon.com test".
Go to //www.amazon.com and do a search under books for "kerry". Look at all the book titles and info on the 1st page from your search results.
Now, do the same thing but search for "bush" this time. Look at all the book titles and info on the 1st page from your search results. |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 12:04:20 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Originally posted by EddyG:
Did I ever state anywhere that this source was "unbiased"? I simply wanted to make others aware of this information, as presented by this source. (Obviously anybody who has enough interest to write a book is going to be biased one way or the other.) |
Since your talking about books to read on the subject (and extremely biased and unreliably sourced ones at that), I challenge you to take the "Bush/Kerry amazon.com test".
Go to //www.amazon.com and do a search under books for "kerry". Look at all the book titles and info on the 1st page from your search results.
Now, do the same thing but search for "bush" this time. Look at all the book titles and info on the 1st page from your search results. |
I've seen you (or someone else) post this already. I still don't get the point ? Is it that because Bush has been around longer there are more books written against him ? Or just to point out how quickly the Kerry books have been thrown together as well ?
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 12:56:55 PM · #96 |
Quote...
MCCAIN DEPLORES ANTI-KERRY AD
Republican senator urges Bush to repudiate it
The Associated Press
Updated: 11:37 a.m. ET Aug. 5, 2004
WASHINGTON - Republican Sen. John McCain, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, called an ad criticizing John Kerry's military service "dishonest and dishonorable" and urged the White House on Thursday to condemn it as well.
"It was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me," McCain said in an interview with The Associated Press, referring to his bitter Republican primary fight with President Bush.
Read A.P. article here.
...close quote.
Originally posted by EddyG:
From this morning's Drudge Report... makes you wonder if all the people who are supporting him because of "the kind of man he is" and his "strong military background" will still feel the same way in light of this:
BOOK CLAIMS KERRY WAR 'FABRICATIONS'
A veterans group seeking to deeply discredit Democrat John Kerry's military service will charge in the new bombshell book UNFIT FOR COMMAND:
# Two of John Kerry's three Purple Heart decorations resulted from self-inflicted wounds, not suffered under enemy fire.
# All three of Kerry's Purple Hearts were for minor injuries, not requiring a single hour of hospitalization.
# A "fanny wound" was the highlight of Kerry's much touted "no man left behind" Bronze Star.
# Kerry turned the tragic death of a father and small child in a Vietnamese fishing boat into an act of "heroism" by filing a false report on the incident.
# Kerry entered an abandoned Vietnamese village and slaughtered the domestic animals owned by the civilians and burned down their homes with his Zippo lighter.
# Kerry's reckless behavior convinced his colleagues that he had to go -- becoming the only Swift Boat veteran to serve only four months.
Also from the same book, mentioned in this report a few days ago, it seems that parts of the Swift Boat video shown at the DNC were re-enactments:
"Kerry carried a home movie camera to record his exploits for later viewing," charges a naval officer in the upcoming book UNFIT FOR COMMAND.
"Kerry would revisit ambush locations for reenacting combat scenes where he would portray the hero, catching it all on film. Kerry would take movies of himself walking around in combat gear, sometimes dressed as an infantryman walking resolutely through the terrain. He even filmed mock interviews of himself narrating his exploits. A joke circulated among Swiftees was that Kerry left Vietnam early not because he received three Purple Hearts, but because he had recorded enough film of himself to take home for his planned political campaigns." |
Message edited by author 2004-08-05 12:58:39. |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 01:14:10 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
I've seen you (or someone else) post this already. I still don't get the point ? Is it that because Bush has been around longer there are more books written against him ? Or just to point out how quickly the Kerry books have been thrown together as well ? |
Yes I have posted it before. My point in doing so is so people can see the vast amount of books out there, many by very reputable people.
One could say that all those books are there cause Bush is the current president and an obvious target. But, do that search for any past president. Republican or Democrat. Nowhere NEAR as many damaging books on any other presidents as are for Bush. The only president that comes close in all my searches is Nixon, which is another point to my example.
If you actually go through those books on Bush, check out info on them and the authors, some of them are from very reputable sources.
Richard Clarke for example. He was in the anti-terrorism departments of the government for 4 presidents. Many have gotten away with saying he is not credible because he is a "scorned employee" out for revenge. Id like to quote Bill Mayer on Clarke, "Could it have been that he was scorned AND telling the truth? Maybe he would have kept his mouth shut had they treated him with respect, but because they did hurt him, he laid it all out on the table."
So my main point is, and this especially goes out to those who are constantly saying "show me proof show me proof" about many of the Bush accusations, THE INFORMATION IS OUT THERE - go read into it.
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 01:38:54 PM · #98 |
I thought there were more interesting quotes towards the end of that article:
[McCain]âI deplore this kind of politics. I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable. As it is, none of these individuals served on the boat (Kerry) commanded. Many of his crew have testified to his courage under fire. I think John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam. I think George Bush served honorably in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.â
and the last paragraph:
Jim Rassmann, an Army veteran who was saved by Kerry, said there were only six crewmates who served with Kerry on his boat. Five support his candidacy and one is deceased.
Personally, I think out of the 3 I'd vote for McCain
|
|
|
|
08/05/2004 01:41:12 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
So my main point is, and this especially goes out to those who are constantly saying "show me proof show me proof" about many of the Bush accusations, THE INFORMATION IS OUT THERE - go read into it. |
I'd rather have YOU pull the "truth" from within all the trash-talk, present it to us, and let us evaluate it. Either that, or convince me that I should invest a lot of time looking for a few pearls in a multitude of pig pens.
Ron |
|
|
|
08/05/2004 02:00:07 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Jim Rassmann, an Army veteran who was saved by Kerry, said there were only six crewmates who served with Kerry on his boat. Five support his candidacy and one is deceased. |
Hmm. Interesting - because in his speech before the DNC, Jim Rassmann said this: "Any one of these 12 guys will tell you, in a tight situation, when your whole future - your whole life - depends on the decisions of one man, you can count on John Kerry".refhere
Interesting how 12 guys can testify about Kerry, but only 6 served with him ( and one of those is dead ).
Does anyone else see a discrepancy in Rassmann's statements? |
|
