| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/09/2004 11:19:48 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Must be a lot of Democrats that you despise, too - like the 29 Democratic Senators and 82 Democratic Congressmen who were also "misled" into voting to authorize Bush to proceed against Sadaam Hussein without U.N. approval.
I think that you should work to insure that they are not re-elected.
Ron |
Well if you can’t trust the president to not mislead you, than whom can you trust? Why shouldn’t they have trusted what the president told them? Shit almost everyone did for a while. I mean when the entire white house is screaming, "Iraq has WMD's", why wouldn’t we believe them? |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 11:21:55 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
I'm sure the other 499,000 people knew what they were protesting for, but this still does not answer the question as to why so many people were in the streets protesting. |
1) Republicans / conservatives are typically independent thinkers; Democrats / liberals are usually more inclined to "group-think" - therefore, it's much more difficult to get Republicans / conservatives to gather en-masse to protest than it is to get Democrats / liberals to gather and protest.
2) As shown by the interview, it is fairly easy to get Democrats / liberals to protest even when they don't know what it is they are protesting for/against.
3) The population of New York City is over 13 times that of Boston ( 8+ million, vs. 600 thousand ). Hence, even if reason number 1 were NOT true, you would only expect 1/16 as many protesters in Boston ( namely, 1/13 of 500,000, or 36,784 ).
4) Many, if not most, of the protests in NYC were coordinated by socialist and/or communist supported organizations, and, as a rule, those are not the kinds of organizations that protest Democratic/Socialistic gatherings.
Ron |
Yes, I know what you mean about republicans/conservatives being independent thinkers...like the way they blindly followed their leader as he and his henchmen intentionally misled them to war (MY OPINION). Very independent thinkers they are, these republicans. |
Must be a lot of Democrats that you despise, too - like the 29 Democratic Senators and 82 Democratic Congressmen who were also "misled" into voting to authorize Bush to proceed against Sadaam Hussein without U.N. approval.
I think that you should work to insure that they are not re-elected.
Ron |
Yes, you are right, but I am just one person and can only do so much, so I concentrate on the administration currently in the White House that I see as the greatest threat to democracy, liberty and world peace. |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 11:42:26 AM · #53 |
And now, getting back to the topic of the forum thread at hand...Bush's military records, or lack of them:
From democracynow.org:
"...new documents from Bush's squadron commander say Bush discussed with him how to avoid drills during 1972. The report on "60 Minutes" said the files were from the personal records of Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984. The files show that Killian grounded Bush from flying when he missed a medical examination and failed to meet performance standards. In one memo, dated Aug. 18, 1972, Killian wrote that he was being pressured from higher-ups in the Guard to gloss over Bush's poor performance and to "sugarcoat" his evaluation."
"At the same time, a former Texas Speaker of the House Ben Barnes has come forward to say that he abused his position power by helping Bush and others get a coveted slot in the National Guard in 1968."
"Yesterday, the Boston Globe reported that a reexamination of President Bush's military records show the president fell well short of meeting his military obligations in the National Guard. According to the Globe, twice during his Guard service, Bush signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a punitive call-up to active duty. But records show he didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment."
"And a group called Texans for Truth recently announced an advertising campaign questioning whether Bush ever trained with the Alabama Air National Guard. The ad quotes a retired lieutenant colonel in the Alabama unit who says he searched for Bush but never met him in 1972 or 1973."
|
|
|
|
09/09/2004 11:52:05 AM · #54 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Man the generalizations are flying like crazy now eh? You actually said communist organized NYC protests. Wow. |
That's correct - but it's not a "generalization". If I didn't think I could back it up, I wouldn't have said it. Wow. |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 12:01:20 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Man the generalizations are flying like crazy now eh? You actually said communist organized NYC protests. Wow. |
That's correct - but it's not a "generalization". If I didn't think I could back it up, I wouldn't have said it. Wow. |
Sounds like "red baiting" to me...Next you'll be calling us commies and pinkos? |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 12:06:15 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
And now, getting back to the topic of the forum thread at hand...Bush's military records, or lack of them:
From democracynow.org:
"...new documents from Bush's squadron commander say Bush discussed with him how to avoid drills during 1972. The report on "60 Minutes" said the files were from the personal records of Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984..." |
Hey, I "discussed" with my commander how to avoid going to Vietnam. So what? That's not a criminal offense, is it? Why, I'll bet that YOU have discussed with YOUR supervisor ways to avoid having to work overtime - or go on some assignment or other. I don't see a "problem" there, but apparently you do.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
"...The files show that Killian grounded Bush from flying when he missed a medical examination and failed to meet performance standards... |
Yep, that's what he SHOULD have done.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
"...In one memo, dated Aug. 18, 1972, Killian wrote that he was being pressured from higher-ups in the Guard to gloss over Bush's poor performance and to "sugarcoat" his evaluation." |
That's grounds for pointing the finger at Killian's "higher-ups", but why should that blame fall on Bush?
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
"At the same time, a former Texas Speaker of the House Ben Barnes has come forward to say that he abused his position power by helping Bush and others get a coveted slot in the National Guard in 1968." |
Again, HE ( Barnes ) may be guilty of "something", but how is it that that accrues to Bush???
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
"Yesterday, the Boston Globe reported that a reexamination of President Bush's military records show the president fell well short of meeting his military obligations in the National Guard. According to the Globe, twice during his Guard service, Bush signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a punitive call-up to active duty. But records show he didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment." |
So, again, he acknowledged that there would be penalties for failing to meet requirements, and apparently didn't meet them. His bad, if true. But, once again, the failure of OTHERS to do THEIR duty should NOT be used to tarnish BUSH. Hold him accountable for HIS words, and HIS actions - but not those of OTHERS.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
"And a group called Texans for Truth recently announced an advertising campaign questioning whether Bush ever trained with the Alabama Air National Guard. The ad quotes a retired lieutenant colonel in the Alabama unit who says he searched for Bush but never met him in 1972 or 1973." |
Yes. And in a telephone conference call with reporters, Mintz conceded that he is not certain whether he himself was present on the dates when pay records show Bush being paid for drill attendance, and he volunteered that he can't say that Bush failed to meet his military obligations:
Mintz: I can't say that he didn't do his duties, but I can say for sure that I was there and I never met George Bush.
Mintz conceded during the telephone conference that he wasn't sure if he himself had been at the base on the specific dates Bush was paid in October and November, and said it was possible that Bush performed office work at the base without his knowing it. By October Bush could only have been paid for non -flying service because he had been officially grounded for failing to take a required flight physical.
Hmm. So Mintz didn't see Bush there when he wasn't there. Yeah, that's conclusive.
Ron
" |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 12:12:12 PM · #57 |
The Bush-Cheney campaign has emphasized to its business allies the importance of urging employees to take advantage of new rules that allow them to vote weeks before Election Day.
Trade associations and companies are heeding the call. Many, such as the Business-Industry Political Action Committee (BIPAC) and The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are poised to launch a massive effort to get pro-business voters to cast their votes in the next several weeks and not wait until Nov. 2.
-- The Hill, September 09, 2004 [link]
.......................................
Looks like Republicans want to lock-in some votes before supporters change their minds. Now, I don't know about you, but I would have a serious problem with my employer "urging" me to vote under some timeline or in anyone direction.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2004 12:14:03 PM · #58 |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 12:21:40 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by bdobe:
The Bush-Cheney campaign has emphasized to its business allies the importance of urging employees to take advantage of new rules that allow them to vote weeks before Election Day.
Trade associations and companies are heeding the call. Many, such as the Business-Industry Political Action Committee (BIPAC) and The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are poised to launch a massive effort to get pro-business voters to cast their votes in the next several weeks and not wait until Nov. 2.
-- The Hill, September 09, 2004 [link]
.......................................
Looks like Republicans want to lock-in some votes before supporters change their minds. Now, I don't know about you, but I would have a serious problem with my employer "urging" me to vote under some timeline or in anyone direction. |
Seems to me that it's the Democrats who would benefit from locking in some votes "before supporters change their minds". The trend is moving AWAY from Kerry at present. |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 12:42:17 PM · #60 |
Bush weaseled his way out of going to Vietnam by getting into the NG, then failed to fulfill his obligations to even the Guard....
Went to Alabama to "work" on a campaign. Reports say he routinely showed up at 1pm, bragging about how much drinking he had done the night before and went home by 5:30pm leaving assigned tasks incomplete.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2004 01:10:16 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Bush weaseled his way out of going to Vietnam by getting into the NG, then failed to fulfill his obligations to even the Guard....
Went to Alabama to "work" on a campaign. Reports say he routinely showed up at 1pm, bragging about how much drinking he had done the night before and went home by 5:30pm leaving assigned tasks incomplete. |
And what reports would those be? |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 01:23:30 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Man the generalizations are flying like crazy now eh? You actually said communist organized NYC protests. Wow. |
That's correct - but it's not a "generalization". If I didn't think I could back it up, I wouldn't have said it. Wow. |
So back it up, Ron. Let's see what sources you have that said this was a communist organized demonstration. |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 01:45:28 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Man the generalizations are flying like crazy now eh? You actually said communist organized NYC protests. Wow. |
That's correct - but it's not a "generalization". If I didn't think I could back it up, I wouldn't have said it. Wow. |
So back it up, Ron. Let's see what sources you have that said this was a communist organized demonstration. |
1) from CNN ( ref: here ):
"Tens of thousands of demonstrators carrying signs and chanting "No More Bush" marched Sunday past Madison Square Garden, the site of the Republican National Convention, which opened Monday.
The march was sponsored by United for Peace and Justice, a group opposed to the U.S.-led war in Iraq."
2) From the Member Groups page of the United for Peace and Justice web site ( ref: here ) - member groups include:
Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS)
Communist Party - Maryland
Communist Party - New York
Communist Party- Central Indiana
Communist Party USA
Democractic Socialism Club of Bethel College
Democratic Socialists of America
Democratic Socialists of America, Chicago chapt
Freedom Road Socialist Organization
Illinois Socialist Party
International Socialist Organization
Partido Socialista del Valle - SP USA Local
Socialist Action
Socialist Alternative
Socialist Organization for Relief, Tradition, and Opposing Fascism
Socialist Party USA
Socialist Party, Ohio chapter
Young Communist League, USA
Young Democratic Socialists
Young Peoples Socialist League
Youth for Socialist Action
Message edited by author 2004-09-09 13:48:15. |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 02:05:52 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Man the generalizations are flying like crazy now eh? You actually said communist organized NYC protests. Wow. |
That's correct - but it's not a "generalization". If I didn't think I could back it up, I wouldn't have said it. Wow. |
So back it up, Ron. Let's see what sources you have that said this was a communist organized demonstration. |
1) from CNN ( ref: here ):
"Tens of thousands of demonstrators carrying signs and chanting "No More Bush" marched Sunday past Madison Square Garden, the site of the Republican National Convention, which opened Monday.
The march was sponsored by United for Peace and Justice, a group opposed to the U.S.-led war in Iraq."
2) From the Member Groups page of the United for Peace and Justice web site ( ref: here ) - member groups include:
Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS)
Communist Party - Maryland
Communist Party - New York
Communist Party- Central Indiana
Communist Party USA
Democractic Socialism Club of Bethel College
Democratic Socialists of America
Democratic Socialists of America, Chicago chapt
Freedom Road Socialist Organization
Illinois Socialist Party
International Socialist Organization
Partido Socialista del Valle - SP USA Local
Socialist Action
Socialist Alternative
Socialist Organization for Relief, Tradition, and Opposing Fascism
Socialist Party USA
Socialist Party, Ohio chapter
Young Communist League, USA
Young Democratic Socialists
Young Peoples Socialist League
Youth for Socialist Action |
So what's your point, Ron? Those groups you've listed above are just a handful of the hundreds of groups listed by United for Peace and Justice. There are many groups listed there including religious groups, cultural groups, peace groups and ethical groups. Did you find what each of those groups you've chosen to list stand for and represent or are you simply making leaps of judgement without any further attempts at understanding who they are? Even if they are communist groups, does that make United for Peace and Justice a communist group? |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 02:29:34 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
So what's your point, Ron? |
I thought that my point was fairly clear: Many, if not most, of the protests in NYC were coordinated by socialist and/or communist supported organizations, and, as a rule, those are not the kinds of organizations that protest Democratic/Socialistic gatherings.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Those groups you've listed above are just a handful of the hundreds of groups listed by United for Peace and Justice. There are many groups listed there including religious groups, cultural groups, peace groups and ethical groups. |
All quite true.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Did you find what each of those groups you've chosen to list stand for and represent... |
I don't feel that I need to. Their names stell me all I need to know.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
...or are you simply making leaps of judgement without any further attempts at understanding who they are? |
I understand what socialists and communists are. No leap required.
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Even if they are communist groups, does that make United for Peace and Justice a communist group? |
No, it doesn't. But, then, I never said it was.
Ron |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 02:34:38 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Seems to me that it's the Democrats who would benefit from locking in some votes "before supporters change their minds". The trend is moving AWAY from Kerry at present. |
I think that's wishful thinking on your part. I'll grant you that there are a handful of national polls that trend towards Mr. Bush. However, as you often have reminded us in other threads, where you've argued for its continued necessity, it's the electoral-college that decides the presidency. Accordingly, the race for electoral-college votes is extremely close, though there have been some wild swings (specially after the smears against Mr. Kerry got so much air time):
This is a screen grab from the Electoral-Vote.com website, which -- again -- does a great job of compiling the all important state polls, as opposed to national polls. I'll say it again, as a strong Kerry supporter, national polls don't worry me too much at this point. The all important barometer, before the Nov. 2nd election, will be after we've had at least one presidential debate.
......................................
By the way, speaking of the electoral-college (which I don't support, since I think we should have a direct say on who our president is), looks like one Republican member of the electoral-college is so disillusioned by the Bush administration that he'll withhold his vote if Mr. Bush wins the election.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2004 02:38:10 PM · #67 |
I realize it's written very pro Bush, so many of you probably won't even read it, or just dismiss it, but here it is just in case you care about the whole issue and not just bashing Bush.
//www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx
If you refuse to read it, basically it says that Bush joned the national guard in 68, spent a lot of time training and served faithfully and fully until 72 when he asked for leave and it was given to him. The anti-bushites only want to look at 6 months of his 5 years in the national guard.
Warning: some of the article may be difficult for the anti-Bush crowd to hear.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2004 02:50:59 PM · #68 |
here are some Bush haters, I almost I forgot I had these
BH1
BH2
BH3
James |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 02:59:10 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by louddog:
I realize it's written very pro Bush, so many of you probably won't even read it, or just dismiss it, but here it is just in case you care about the whole issue and not just bashing Bush.
//www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx
|
Thanks for posting this article, I just hope others will read it.
James |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 03:47:30 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
So what's your point, Ron? |
I thought that my point was fairly clear: Many, if not most, of the protests in NYC were coordinated by socialist and/or communist supported organizations, and, as a rule, those are not the kinds of organizations that protest Democratic/Socialistic gatherings.
Ron |
Ok, then I misunderstood, but still don't understand the above statement. Please elaborate. |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 03:57:00 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by jab119:
here are some Bush haters, I almost I forgot I had these
BH1
BH2
BH3
James |
Hey James! Glad to see you were protesting last week at the RNC. I didn't know you were with the liberals. I have some pics just like those...I'll try posting them later. |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 04:02:25 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by jab119:
here are some Bush haters, I almost I forgot I had these
BH1
BH2
BH3
James |
Hey James! Glad to see you were protesting last week at the RNC. I didn't know you were with the liberals. I have some pics just like those...I'll try posting them later. |
Oh I was not protesting, just taking pics...plus this was taken several months ago at the Houston Art Car Parade.
I like Bush
James |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 08:14:45 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
And now, getting back to the topic of the forum thread at hand...Bush's military records, or lack of them:
From democracynow.org:
"...new documents from Bush's squadron commander say Bush discussed with him how to avoid drills during 1972. The report on "60 Minutes" said the files were from the personal records of Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984. The files show that Killian grounded Bush from flying when he missed a medical examination and failed to meet performance standards. In one memo, dated Aug. 18, 1972, Killian wrote that he was being pressured from higher-ups in the Guard to gloss over Bush's poor performance and to "sugarcoat" his evaluation." |
Can someone tell me what military issue typewriter Jerry Killian used to type these memos? I'm curious how one can superscript the "th" in 111th and 187th on a standard typewriter back in May 1972. I also don’t remember having proportional spaced fonts on my Smith-Corona. All the typewriters I remember used a fixed spaced courier style font. Can you say fabricated story? Sure you can. It's easy F-A-B-R-I-C-A-T-E-D.
Memo 1
Memo 2 |
|
|
|
09/09/2004 08:39:23 PM · #74 |
The Republican Noise Machine is well at work here! You've clearly read the Matt Drudge Report, which has a link to a story running on CNSNews.com (I like the play on the CBSNews.com URL, by the way), which makes the same allegation you're presenting here as your own.
The Weekly Standard, a well known Republican tool of misinformation runs a similar story. In fact, it seems that this where you lifted your post from:
"[T]he apostrophes are curlicues of the sort produced by word processors on personal computers, not the straight vertical hashmarks typical of typewriters. Finally, in some references to Bush's unit--the 111thFighter Interceptor Squadron--the "th" is a superscript in a smaller size than the other type. Again, this is typical (and often done automatically) in modern word processing programs. Although several experts allow that such a rendering might have been theoretically possible in the early 1970s, it would have been highly unlikely. Superscripts produced on typewriters--the numbers preceding footnotes in term papers, for example--were almost always in the same size as the regular type." [ link to Weekly Standard story ]
As the author of the Republican Noise Machine notes in his book, and I paraphrase, it's not important that Republicans get the facts right, it's only important that they throw up enough mud to cloud the truth.
.......................................
Originally posted by thelsel:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
And now, getting back to the topic of the forum thread at hand...Bush's military records, or lack of them:
From democracynow.org:
"...new documents from Bush's squadron commander say Bush discussed with him how to avoid drills during 1972. The report on "60 Minutes" said the files were from the personal records of Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984. The files show that Killian grounded Bush from flying when he missed a medical examination and failed to meet performance standards. In one memo, dated Aug. 18, 1972, Killian wrote that he was being pressured from higher-ups in the Guard to gloss over Bush's poor performance and to "sugarcoat" his evaluation." |
Can someone tell me what military issue typewriter Jerry Killian used to type these memos? I'm curious how one can superscript the "th" in 111th and 187th on a standard typewriter back in May 1972. I also don’t remember having proportional spaced fonts on my Smith-Corona. All the typewriters I remember used a fixed spaced courier style font. Can you say fabricated story? Sure you can. It's easy F-A-B-R-I-C-A-T-E-D.
Memo 1
Memo 2 |
|
|
|
|
09/09/2004 09:42:25 PM · #75 |
Damn right wing leaning AP news has the story too, and that damn right wing yahoo is posting it!!!
//news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=544&u=/ap/20040910/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_memos_3&printer=1
|
|
