|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#261
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Cassel wrote:
GRL wrote: There are a lot more people who would be happy to vote against bad-luck Bush if the Democrats ran a respectable candidate instead of John Kerry. Gee yes. If the D's had run anything decent or someone fine like Kerrey (Bob) I think the vote for the D's would be almost unanimous. As it is, the D's have managed to find a piece of pond scum I wouldn't ever vote or or have loyalty to in this POS candidate. Incredibly, I'm voting Bush not because of Bush, but because I'll never stand the misery of slimey kerry and worse edwards - the trial lawyer turd. Now if THAT isn't a ringing endorsement... Bill "I think Spiderman and Alice N. Wonderland might steal it (in OH *and* FL)" S. |
Ads |
#262
|
|||
|
|||
GRL wrote:
The trouble is that the wrong Kerry is running. Bob Kerry one can respect and admire while disagreeing with him. The pond scum John Kerry's behavior: self-glorifying lies about his delusional activities during his short 4 months in Vietnam, insulting our troops with outrageous war crimes charges, and then offering aid and comfort to the enemy meeting with them in France (while our POW's were being abused by them) is so far beyond the pale... It is disgusting he was nominated by the Democrats. We have a traitor running for president thanks to the Democrat primary voters. Nice. Very nice. What the devil is with the Democrats? They could have nominated Joe Lieberman, an honorable man that anyone would be satisfied to have as president, Republican or Democrat, and they nominate the self-serving traitorous liar John Kerry. His own campaign has had to disavow his repeated nonsense about his life being turned around by being illegally ordered by Nixon into Cambodia with his river patrol boat. The boat wasn't there and Nixon wasn't even president. Democrats had a lot of fun with Reagan's lapses where he confused movie scripts with real memories. But at least his stories were meant to uplift the human spirit by giving positive examples of human behavior. Kerry's self-serving stories are meant to make Kerry look good...which he's not. He's no Ron Reagan...or Jack Kennedy, for that matter. Jack Kennedy was a patriot and he would puke at the thought of scum like Kerry running for president. There are a lot more people who would be happy to vote against bad-luck Bush if the Democrats ran a respectable candidate instead of John Kerry. Ya know, for a top-poster you write durn good. Bill "but it's Bob KERREY, not Kerry" S. |
#263
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:09:43 -0700, Paul Cassel wrote:
GRL wrote: There are a lot more people who would be happy to vote against bad-luck Bush if the Democrats ran a respectable candidate instead of John Kerry. Gee yes. If the D's had run anything decent or someone fine like Kerrey (Bob) I think the vote for the D's would be almost unanimous. As it is, the D's have managed to find a piece of pond scum I wouldn't ever vote or or have loyalty to in this POS candidate. Incredibly, I'm voting Bush not because of Bush, but because I'll never stand the misery of slimey kerry and worse edwards - the trial lawyer turd. -paul I would vote for my neighbors german sheperd, before I would vote for Bush. Anyone, almost anything, is better than another 4 years, of him screwing up my country. He is the worst president of my lifetime. Nixon, may have been a crook, but he was a better president. I am really disappointed in my fellow man. Why would you award someone with another 4 years, when they have made so many major mistakes. The Packer's won on Sunday, beating the Washington Redskins, let's hope that prediction continues. The Redskins lose, the incumbant loses. Being a Packer's fan, most of my life, how fitting that it was them, that got to play the Sunday before the election. In spite of the damage done in the last 4 years, I still believe that- Life is Good! Jeff |
#264
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:11:03 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
wrote in message : LOL! The idea that there are any socialists at all in US politics is very amusing indeed! Your choice in 2004, as ever, is between the right and the far right. Kerry is the most liberal senator in the US, surpassing even Ted Kennedy. Exactly :-) Guy -- May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University |
#265
|
|||
|
|||
Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:13:54 +0000,
, "Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote: LOL! The idea that there are any socialists at all in US politics is very amusing indeed! Your choice in 2004, as ever, is between the right and the far right. Kerry is the most liberal senator in the US, surpassing even Ted Kennedy. Exactly :-) Guy They're going to vote exactly like the French did. Elect the facist to keep out the nazi. -- zk |
#266
|
|||
|
|||
: LOL! The idea that there are any socialists at all in US politics is : very amusing indeed! Your choice in 2004, as ever, is between the : right and the far right. : : Kerry is the most liberal senator in the US, surpassing even : Ted Kennedy. : : Exactly :-) : : Guy www.factcheck.org says he is the 11th, not the first. you might want to get the facts. Pat in TX |
#267
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:09:43 -0700, Paul Cassel wrote:
GRL wrote: There are a lot more people who would be happy to vote against bad-luck Bush if the Democrats ran a respectable candidate instead of John Kerry. Gee yes. If the D's had run anything decent or someone fine like Kerrey (Bob) I think the vote for the D's would be almost unanimous. As it is, the D's have managed to find a piece of pond scum I wouldn't ever vote or or have loyalty to in this POS candidate. Incredibly, I'm voting Bush not because of Bush, but because I'll never stand the misery of slimey kerry and worse edwards - the trial lawyer turd. -paul Seems to me that Kerry dug out the truth of BCCI, to the chagrin of both Republicans and Democrats, as well as being the only one willing to go after Iran/Contra. I think the guy has guts. |
#268
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:09:08 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
wrote: On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:58:17 -0500, "GRL" claims: What the devil is with the Democrats? They could have nominated Joe Lieberman, an honorable man that anyone would be satisfied to have as president, Republican or Democrat, Anti-semitism is alive and healthy in the Democrat party, as always. It fits in with their anti-black agenda. The only mystery is why Jews and blacks fall into lockstep during elections, drinking the liberal Kool-Aid, even though their votes are viewed by party leaders as the sole property of the Dems. Maybe you just don't understand anything? |
#269
|
|||
|
|||
....stuff deleted
4 months of the most dangerous work in the war, bar none. Kerry did not ask for awards, this is not how the military operates. A superior officier, who may or may not be delusional, I'll admit, must submit a recommendation which is then investigated before any awards are given (even purple hearts). But then, those with a political axe to grind don't care much about truth. The following morning after Kerry's alleged first intense combat engagement, he requested a Purple Heart from his commanding officer, Grant Hibbard (Ret.). http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/...ves/002447.php No individual can request a combat award. They can document what happened, with the recommendation of their superior officer, and wait for a judgement. While I've read the web site, supposedly describing how he requested the award, I can't give it much credence. The process described is, simply, not how such awards are given. As to the charges that the boats violated the borders of Laos and Cambodia, there is no denying that it happened, and it happened frequently. On Wednesday, the Kerry campaign acknowledged that John Kerry probably was not in Cambodia on Christmas 1968, contrary to the senator's decades-old assertion. http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/200...0512-6687r.htm Sure, pick a given date and you can, with good probability, say that he wasn't in Cambodia on that day. The reality is, most of these operations were covert, not documented by normal Navy processes (when picking up SEALS, for example, the boat drivers do not report their goings and comings). That Kerry, in his patrols up and down the river did cross into Cambodian territory is undeniable. This was the role of these boats and it was expected that this would happen. On a personal basis, you may or may not feel that his awards are worthwhile. Personally, anyone who would board one of those boats deserves a medal for bravery. Anyone who willingly toured on one is either an idiot, exceptionally brave, or has no survival instinct. I believe that Kerry does not fit in the last category, and probably doesn't fit in the first. Rick |
#270
|
|||
|
|||
"Rick" wrote No individual can request a combat award. They can document what happened, with the recommendation of their superior officer, and wait for a judgement. While I've read the web site, supposedly describing how he requested the award, I can't give it much credence. The process described is, simply, not how such awards are given. One can write his own, and have it submitted up the chaian. A suitable commander, looking to pad *his own* resume, might just sign it. Not saying that is what happened in this case, but it *does* happen. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
off road or on road tyre | Skunk | UK | 14 | July 21st 04 07:55 PM |
Last Chance Road | [email protected] | Rides | 2 | June 3rd 04 03:01 AM |
Last Chance Road | [email protected] | Rides | 1 | April 29th 04 02:38 AM |
on road and off road | Richard Goodman | UK | 15 | December 16th 03 04:03 PM |
Sierra Nevada - Tioga/Sonora Pass | [email protected] | Rides | 1 | November 3rd 03 07:52 AM |