WHOS THE NEXT PRESIDENT

[Guest Karlson]

I don't really care what the rest of the world wants done, the fact is though, most of country is in favor of Bush. To me, Kerry is not a viable option and the thought of him in office sends shrills up my spine.....

←

okey. i wont argue. but most of country? ehh. i am not sure about that. it is just too close. At November 2nd,we will see, what will happen. Peace :)

[ChuckV986]

I don't really care what the rest of the world wants done, the fact is though, most of country is in favor of Bush. To me, Kerry is not a viable option and the thought of him in office sends shrills up my spine.....

←

Haha, I feel the exact same way, but about Bush. I just don't see voting for him as a viable option. Too bad there isn't a real third party...

[turbor850]

Wow, ignorance is bliss, isn't it. You keeeep pretending Kerry is ahead in the polls and that its possible to have a 57% - 52% split.

yeah, its a 57% - %2% split, ignorance is bliss . . . . .

[InlineTurbo]

Even discounting the socialist media in other countries it is easy to see why they would be for Kerry.

Weak, socialist leaning, non comittal, poll driven leader = weak America.

Strong, no B.S., Don't care about polls leader = Strong America.

I could not vote for somebody who betrayed his fellow soldiers while they were still in combat like Kerry did. Faking after action reports to get medals from an engagement where you ran away is pretty low as well. Kerry was on the big boat faking his after action report about how he saved everybody's jerk while the real men were hauling the wounded boat and its crew out of the water. Not really classy IMHO.

Also it looks like Kerry was not Honorably Discharged from the service. Probably explains why he isn't signing the 180. For all of you who claim there is no Liberal media explain to me why we keep hearing the Bush = AWOL stories 100 times after it has been debunked and the press isn't hounding Kerry about signing his 180 to release his millitary recods? How come they don't have stories about his lying (proven fact in Kerry's own words) about being sent to Cambodia and his 2 faked purple hearts?

Or why isn't this story being run as a 60 minutes special by CBS?

"An official Navy document on Senator Kerry's campaign Web site listed as Mr. Kerry's "Honorable Discharge from the Reserves" opens a door on a well kept secret about his military service.

The document is a form cover letter in the name of the Carter administration's secretary of the Navy, W. Graham Claytor. It describes Mr. Kerry's discharge as being subsequent to the review of "a board of officers." This in it self is unusual. There is nothing about an ordinary honorable discharge action in the Navy that requires a review by a board of officers.

According to the secretary of the Navy's document, the "authority of reference" this board was using in considering Mr. Kerry's record was "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163. "This section refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn't have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge.

A Kerry campaign spokesman, David Wade, was asked whether Mr. Kerry had ever been a victim of an attempt to deny him an honorable discharge. There has been no response to that inquiry.

The document is dated February 16, 1978. But Mr. Kerry's military commitment began with his six-year enlistment contract with the Navy on February 18, 1966. His commitment should have terminated in 1972. It is highly unlikely that either the man who at that time was a Vietnam Veterans Against the War leader, John Kerry, requested or the Navy accepted an additional six year reserve commitment. And the Claytor document indicates proceedings to reverse a less than honorable discharge that took place sometime prior to February 1978.

......

For example, while America was still at war, Mr. Kerry had met with the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong delegation to the Paris Peace talks in May 1970 and then held a demonstration in July 1971 in Washington to try to get Congress to accept the enemy's seven point peace proposal without a single change. Woodrow Wilson threw Eugene Debs, a former presidential candidate, in prison just for demonstrating for peace negotiations with Germany during World War I. No court overturned his imprisonment. He had to receive a pardon from President Harding.

......

The "board of officers" review reported in the Claytor document is even more extraordinary because it came about "by direction of the President." No normal honorable discharge requires the direction of the president. The president at that time was James Carter. This adds another twist to the story of Mr. Kerry's hidden military records.

Mr. Carter's first act as president was a general amnesty for draft dodgers and other war protesters. Less than an hour after his inauguration on January 21, 1977, while still in the Capitol building, Mr. Carter signed Executive Order 4483 empowering it. By the time it became a directive from the Defense Department in March 1977 it had been expanded to include other offenders who may have had general, bad conduct, dishonorable discharges, and any other discharge or sentence with negative effect on military records. In those cases the directive outlined a procedure for appeal on a case by case basis before a board of officers. A satisfactory appeal would result in an improvement of discharge status or an honorable discharge.

Mr. Kerry has repeatedly refused to sign Standard Form 180, which would allow the release of all his military records. And some of his various spokesmen have claimed that all his records are already posted on his Web site. But the Washington Post already noted that the Naval Personnel Office admitted that they were still withholding about 100 pages of files."

The whole article can be found here:

http://www.nysun.com/article/3107

Edited October 19, 2004 by InlineTurbo

[Karlson]

thats a long one!

[fromtheshadows]

DID i miss something? The COMMANDER IN CHEIFs responsibility is to keep our soldiers out of harms way unless ABSOLUTELY necessary. OK lets talk about betrayal for a second. A man sends innocent children to war to kill other innocent people on a lie. Of course the haves and the have mores wont send their children.

I suppose those of you bashing kerry for what has been sold to you on his military record support our grave mistake of going to VIETNAM without proper intelligence... Well , sorry for the personal attack but you lack that very same quality.

I feel strongly that every death attatched to this IRAQI war sits solely on the shoulders of this (never even elected by the popular vote in the first place) presidents administration. Thats a lot of death, so if they reinstate the draft in the next four years I guess well know who in here contributed. <_<

Edited October 19, 2004 by ashman

[fromtheshadows]

war is always good for companies in the business of war, ... among them halliburton

[matt1122]

*cough cough*

A man sends innocent children to war to kill other innocent people on a lie.

They volunteered.

Of course the haves and the have mores wont send their children.

One of my best friends is in the military and his family has more money than you will ever see in your entire life.

When he's home he drives a Maserati Coupe, costing over $100,000 and he's 24. He might be in the minority but that doesn't mean stuff. Some people may join the military because it's a good career decision - you shouldn't make that decision unless you ARE really ready to give your life to your country, so don't give me any "yeah well some people don't plan on having to go to war" stuff. The military is NOT a free ticket to college or WHATEVER, you have to work to pay for what you get out of the deal.

I feel strongly that every death attatched to this IRAQI war sits solely on the shoulders of this presidents administration.

Because in any other case it would rest on the shoulders of this president and umm... Mickey Mouse? He's the leader of our country, of course it rests on his shoulders, that doesn't mean its unjustified.

(never even elected by the popular vote in the first place)

A big part of the reason the electoral college is there in the first place, to keep idiots from taking control of the country.

Thats a lot of death, so if they reinstate the draft in the next four years I guess well know who in here contributed.

What the hell does that mean?

[InlineTurbo]

The COMMANDER IN CHEIFs responsibility is to keep our soldiers out of harms way unless ABSOLUTELY necessary.

Show me where in the constitution it says this?

I feel strongly that every death attatched to this IRAQI war sits solely on the shoulders of this presidents administration.

How about the Inaction of the Clinton Administration. Howabout not taking care of Sadam the first time because we listened to the U.N.? How about Sadam himself? Remember it is terrorists attacking us there. Sadam supporters and foreign terrorists. Not regular Iraqis. So we shouldn't have taken on Germany? Or Japan? Using your logic this is true. Germany never attacked the U.S. on our own soil.

Also show me where John Kerry DIDN'T say this:

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" > - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

or these other prominant democrats:

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, > December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." > - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." > - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." > - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." > - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." > - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" > - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including all Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." > -Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."> - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

Edited October 20, 2004 by InlineTurbo

[Bay13]

Thats a lot of death, so if they reinstate the draft in the next four years I guess well know who in here contributed.

This statement lets us know a lot of whats going on in your mind. You don't want to get drafted? Close? Whats amazing is the President said there would be no draft, the second in charge said there would be no draft but you believe John Kerrys scare tactics. (remember it was the Democrats that put the bill before Congress (Kerry is a Democrat)) Good news for you the president isn't incharge of the draft, just like he isn't incharge of abortion. Congress has to cause the draft, so get mad at your rep, not the President. Don't believe the Ex-Generals that say what Kerry want to here, remember they are EX, and they are the ones that said it would be an nasty compain to take the country and it would take many more troops etc. They were wrong then and now. Plus the ones incharge now don't want more troops, if they did they would ask for them.

on a lie.

Above is also part of your problem, you want it to be a lie, well lets make it a lie, but remember John Kerry believed the same intelligence reports that the President believed. Because someone makes a decision based on information that later might turn out to be incorrect doesn't make it a lie at the time the decision was made.

If there were no WMDs then why the latest blast of BS from Kerry about Bush not gaurding them? Only problem with this deception is that those 390tons of stuff were suppose to be gaurded by the UN troops that were there before we invaded. Once we arrive the stuff had already been moved. (One more reason to leave the UN out of this, they can't even handle simple gaurd duty) :P

[Deltablade]

DID i miss something? The COMMANDER IN CHEIFs responsibility is to keep our soldiers out of harms way unless ABSOLUTELY necessary. OK lets talk about betrayal for a second. A man sends innocent children to war to kill other innocent people on a lie. Of course the haves and the have mores wont send their children.

I suppose those of you bashing kerry for what has been sold to you on his military record support our grave mistake of going to VIETNAM without proper intelligence... Well , sorry for the personal attack but you lack that very same quality.

    I feel strongly that every death attatched to this IRAQI war sits solely on the shoulders of this (never even elected by the popular vote in the first place) presidents administration. Thats a lot of death, so if they reinstate the draft in the next four years I guess well know who in here contributed.

←

The responsibility of the Commander in Chief is to use the military to protect the States. And I don't know about you ashman but if there ever is a draft, (which there will not be for the Iraq war, unless WWIII breaks out) I will proudly serve in the military if drafted. Why would I do that you may ask? Because some things are worth fighting for.

[bigc]

our whole government is mixed up. this war is fighting for no reason. its like someone coming into your house and tries to force you to change your ways after hundreds of years, would you like it?? hell look at these gas prices, if bush would let them people be and stop going around the world like he is president of the world and put more into the us, this would be a much better place

[ontheheel]

our whole government is mixed up. this war is fighting for no reason. its like someone coming into your house and tries to force you to change your ways after hundreds of years, would you like it?? hell look at these gas prices, if bush would let them people be and stop going around the world like he is president of the world and put more into the us, this would be a much better place

←

forced them to change their ways after what had been going on after hundreds of years? have you read anything about iraqi history? :monkey:

[gdizzle]

forced them to change their ways after what had been going on after hundreds of years? have you read anything about iraqi history?

←

Or anything at all.....

[Guest DougK]

inline, remeber NOT just the UN but the picture that the MEDIA was showing of the war. Thats the other half of the equation to why we pulled out of desert storm the first time.