|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| May 11th, 2004 04:10 PM | |||
| mburbank | How often do I have to say that posting some of these articles is beneath you before you catch on that I respect you more than you respect yourself? Stop being such a pissy provocateur. | ||
| May 11th, 2004 03:52 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
The analysis is self explainatory. I don't have to explain all the details to you and Kevin and I don't care if nobody else understands what I am thinking. All I'm doing is throwing you a bone. I am curious to what you guys have to say about these articles. You've known me long ebough to know what I think about it.....right? |
||
| May 11th, 2004 10:55 AM | |||
| mburbank |
Vinth, if you don't try harder no one is going to play with you. Nalds, OH! Now I get it. See, the reason I was confused is that Kev and I post our opinions and support them with journalism. I didn't see that as the same as you cutting and pasting an opinion piece as if it were journalism and offering little or nothing of your own analysis. My bad. |
||
| May 11th, 2004 09:38 AM | |||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
Quote:
|
||
| May 10th, 2004 06:52 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
Fine. opinion piece = Raygun, Kevin and Max stating their opinions. Can you fit that square into the square shaped hole? |
||
| May 10th, 2004 06:41 PM | |||
| mburbank |
Okay, count me in for confused too. I don't know what you're trying to say at all. Maybe you are confusing. It's nice you know what you mean, but communication is all about making other people know what you mean. |
||
| May 10th, 2004 06:39 PM | |||
| VinceZeb |
Quote:
|
||
| May 10th, 2004 06:22 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
No Kevin, you are confused. I know exactly what I am saying. It's possible for you or I to post an original opinion piece here at I-Mockery and that's what I was referring to. |
||
| May 10th, 2004 05:44 PM | |||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
Quote:
But anyway, enough tangents. Let's do something educational and beneficial for these boards. Contribute to the "Kerry vs. Bush" thread. I know you will, because I know you hate all of this mudslinging, partisan, nonsense that Democrats are most certainly famous for. Let's rise above that and compare policy initiatives, ok? |
||
| May 10th, 2004 05:32 PM | |||
| mburbank |
"Now Kevin is trying to tell ME why MY posts mean!?!" Well, lord knows someone ought to try. |
||
| May 10th, 2004 04:54 PM | |||
| kellychaos | That's what I mean by her going too far; however, just because you oppose the actions of the current administration, it doesn't mean that you support the enemy. Screw you and your "Yer either wid us or agin us!" attitude. It's not that black and white and it makes you sound like Vinth. | ||
| May 10th, 2004 04:48 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
HAHAHA! Now Kevin is trying to tell ME why MY posts mean!?! "Some of those idiots are probably opposed to him for the same reason that they are opposed to Jane Fonda and others." - kelly Yeah! For giving moral support to our nations enemies during war time. ...sound familiar. Well it should because the same thing is happening right now and that's bad news for John Kerry. |
||
| May 10th, 2004 04:26 PM | |||
| kellychaos | Some of those idiots are probably opposed to him for the same reason that they are opposed to Jane Fonda and others. He opposed the war and they felt betrayed even though he was one of them ... perhaps more so because he was supposed to be part of the brotherhood. Further, some of those people probably feel that their entire lives were vindicated by having served in that war. I've met other soldiers who have seemed to have placed the whole value of their lives on their military career or service in a particular conflict. I still meet those kind of people today. Sure, military service IS something of which to be proud ... so is crtical thought and an ability to look at things objectively. Can you imagine those people in the face of someone trying to take all their pride away with a few comments. It's not rocker science people; it's human nature. Although I too have issues with Jane Fonda because I think that she went over the line in a issue in which she really had no authority, in my view. I do not with Kerry because he has a right to express his views on something he's seen first hand no matter what a few souls who probably feel betrayed have to say. | ||
| May 10th, 2004 04:12 PM | |||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
That is such a bullshit argument. First of all, if by "opinion piece" you mean Op/Eds, well you actually don't get those on here all that often. What you do see are articles pasted from various places, newspapers, etc. If you want to post "opinion pieces," how about we start a thread, a Kerry vs. Bush thread, where we can take them ISSUE-BY-ISSUE, analyze where they stand on substantive policy, and then let people decide what they think....? This will be easy. You can cut and paste from the Bush campaign website, and I'll cut and paste from the Kerry website, ok? How about it? No more Vietnam, no more Kerry face lifts, no more anything. Just policy........? |
||
| May 10th, 2004 03:56 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
Now, now Kevin. That wouldn't be fair, would it...... People post opinion pieces here all the time. When everyone else stops, so will I. |
||
| May 10th, 2004 03:52 PM | |||
| KevinTheOmnivore | Then please stop informing us on every time a POW passes gas in Kerry's direction...... | ||
| May 10th, 2004 03:51 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
To be perfectly honest with you guys. I promise, I am not at all worried that Bush will lose the election. It's WAY to early ........ |
||
| May 10th, 2004 01:14 PM | |||
| mburbank | I think it's a well known fact that the vast majority of people think naldo doesn't know what he's talking about. I can quote multiple sources if I have to. | ||
| May 10th, 2004 12:10 PM | |||
| KevinTheOmnivore | You are absurd, Ronnie. This entire thread is absurd. You're scared. You, much like this administration, are backpedaling. You realize that Bush's entire foreign policy has gone to shit. You're nervous. I think with good reason..... | ||
| May 10th, 2004 11:02 AM | |||
| mburbank |
Naldo, as far as I know no reputable polling has been done of Nam vets, so you're basing your 'vast numbers' theory on a handful of reports, and your not looking into how those reports got into the media or what media you're looking at. There are bound to be exit polls at the election, and then we'll hve some idea. In the meantime you know only what you gobble up like a starved goldfish. If people can be talked into the idea that W did a better job during the Vietnam war (and the comparison is relevant what with them both running for President and both being the same age and both having servwd, sort of) then so be it. You have. But don't try to convince yourself that it's becuase of what the 'vast majority' of vets think, becuase you have no idea at all what they thin and neither do I. I'll tell you what though, you'd need more than a dozen to form a statistically significant portion of vets. You might even need more than two dozen. I think there are a lot of vets out there. A vast majority would be more than three quarters. Unless you're trying to sound stupid as some sort of bizaarre object lesson to people who are completely certain the vast majority of vets support Kerry, put a cork in your blowhole. You're embarassing yourself even more than when you claimed to be black. |
||
| May 9th, 2004 10:31 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
MORE!? http://www.opinioneditorials.com/fre..._20040505.html May 05, 2004 Vets Against Kerry! Doug Hagin The Democratic Party wants very badly to defeat President George W. Bush in November. They are desirous of replacing him with a president they think can better guide America on issues like abortion, taxes, the economy, and of course the war on terrorism. In John Kerry, the Democrats think they have the man to unseat Bush and move this nation to the ideological left, where they want it to head. Now whether or not Senator Kerry can beat Bush in the general election remains to be seen, but record of Kerry on the most important issue of this election, defense and national security, is already very plain to see. Yes the Democratic Party has offered up the military record and Vietnam medals won by Kerry in service to America over and over again. Yes they have painted him again and again as the most stalwart of military heroes. The truth of his record in the military has been built up by the Democrats of 2004, but what do Kerry’s war time colleagues have to say of his service during and after his tour in Vietnam? On Tuesday, May 4thy, hundreds of those former military colleagues held a press conference to sign a petition declaring John Kerry unfit to be America’s commander in chief. Now this is quite a departure from what the Democrats have said about Kerry isn’t it? “What is going to happen on Tuesday is an event that really is historical in dimension.” John O’Neill, a Vietnam veteran and a former Navy PCF (Patrol Fast Craft) boat commander said of the signing. The event was organized by a new group calling themselves Swift Boat Veterans For Truth. According to O’Neill, the group has signatures from 19 of 23 officers who served with Kerry, as well as every commanding officer Kerry had in Vietnam. And all of those signers are declaring their feelings that Kerry is unfit for the job of commander in chief. Apparently John Kerry was not too pleased to see his former comrades express their views on his hero status which he and his party has bestowed upon him. At the press conference, held at the National Press Club, O’Neill announced that Kerry had phoned the founder of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, former Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman and pleaded with him not to go public with the groups distaste at Kerry possibly being commander in chief. The effort fell on deaf ears however, and for 90 minutes veteran after veteran, described why they feel Kerry betrayed his fellow troops by alleging that American troops committed war crimes in Vietnam. The group also is demanding Kerry authorize the Department of Defense to release all his military records. Admiral Hoffman said this of Kerry and his opposition to his candidacy. “ I signed this letter because I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust-all absolute tenets of command.” Other veterans who served with Kerry offered their opinions on his character as well. Steve Gardner said of Kerry, “I watched him put his crew in jeopardy. Charles Plumely described Kerry as “self-absorbed, requiring constant supervision.”. Barnard Wollf questioned one of Kerry’s Purple Hearts saying “ He needs to clarify that first purple heart.” Speaking on that same Purple Heart, Grant Hibbard, who was Kerry’s commander when he received his first Purple Heart had this to say. “ I received the report on the mission; there had been no enemy fire.” Hibbard also noted that Kerry received no medical treatment for the wound which would result in the awarding of the Purple Heart. The why’s and wherefores of Kerry medals, however is not the main thrust or target of the groups opposition to Kerry though. In the letter signed by these veterans their real aim is clearly defined. “It is our collective judgment that, upon your return from Vietnam, you grossly and knowingly distorted the conduct of the American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen of that war (including a betrayal of many of us, without regard for the danger your actions caused us.) Further, we believe that you have withheld and/or distorted material facts as to your own conduct in this war.” Now before anyone accuses these veterans of focusing entirely on Kerry’s military service let me remind the of this. Kerry has focused his entire campaign largely on that same record. Kerry has defined his campaign and indeed himself, by his military service and record. The letter from these veterans has a stirring ending that every American should read and re-read very carefully before voting this November. “Senator Kerry, we were there. We know the truth. We have been silent long enough. The stakes are too great, not only for America in general but, most important, for those who have followed us into service in Iraq and Afghanistan. We call upon you to provide a full, accurate accounting of your conduct in Vietnam.” So next time we hear Kerry crowing about his hero status let us pause and reflect upon why so many who have fist-hand knowledge of his service in Vietnam are so vehemently opposed to his becoming commander in chief. ********************* Look at this site.... http://www.vnsfvetakerry.com/ And this one.... http://www.usvetdsp.com/jf_kerry.htm Have a look at these documented facts..... http://www.tinyvital.com/BlogArchives/000392.html and more................... http://vikingphoenix.com/e2004/vietn...ainstkerry.htm and more........................... http://members.aol.com/viperash50/kerry/kerry.html I could keep going but it's time to go home.......... |
||
| May 9th, 2004 10:00 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
The fact that you keep bringing up Bush shows your argument lacks any credibility. It's commonly known that Kerry is despised by his fellow Vietnam vets....as well as all vets. I've read countless stories over the past few months online.....why are you pretending that you haven't? That's the real question. Here's one. http://www.newszap.com/articles/2004...ware/dsn04.txt Veterans blast Kerry's stance: Anti-war activities draw criticism By Joe Rogalsky, Delaware State News DOVER - James Thompson, a 23-year Marine Corps veteran, remembers the insults hurled at him after he returned home from Vietnam. One day, an elderly woman called him a "baby killer" as he strolled down the street. "I kept walking," said Mr. Thompson, a Dover resident who is a member of the state Veterans Commission. "What are you going to do to an 80-year-old woman?" Memories of people calling him a "baby killer" and a "murderer" are why Mr. Thompson does not like Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, the Massachusetts senator who is a decorated Vietnam War veteran. After returning from Vietnam, Sen. Kerry became an anti-war activist and testified before Congress that U.S. troops had committed atrocities such as rape and murder of civilians. Sen. Kerry's statements, Mr. Thompson said, caused all U.S. troops who served in Vietnam to be labeled as war criminals and become the target of abuse from anti-war Americans. "That makes me a little unhappy," Mr. Thompson said of Sen. Kerry's anti-war activity. "I saw some things I did not like, but they were few and far between. Just like with what is going on in Iraq now (with prisoners being abused), a few got carried away but you cannot say that everyone in the military is a sadist." The military careers of Sen. Kerry and President Bush have become major issues in this campaign. Sen. Kerry, a decorated veteran, highlights his military service as he tries to convince voters he is the best man to lead the country in the post-Sept. 11 era. Opponents, however, question his experience as a Swift boat skipper. On Tuesday, a group of former Swift boat seamen held a news conference in Washington to accuse Sen. Kerry of dishonoring Vietnam veterans in 1971 with his accusations then that U.S. forces had committed atrocities, and by subsequently exploiting his military service to advance his political career. The group, which included two of Sen. Kerry's commanding officers and several other Swift boat skippers, is the most organized challenge so far to Sen. Kerry's Vietnam-era activities. Sen. Kerry's aides quickly organized their own media event with the senator's crewmates and fellow seamen to attest to his heroism and antiwar efforts. Democrats have questioned President Bush's time as a pilot in the Texas and Alabama National Guard during the Vietnam War, saying no documents exist to verify that he served as long as he should have. Mr. Thompson, however, does not worry about the president's National Guard career. Mr. Thompson said he volunteered for Vietnam duty to get a promotion, but does not begrudge others who served in the Guard and avoided combat duty. "Why should he volunteer?" Mr. Thompson asked. "If he was lucky enough to beat it without having to go to Canada or Russia, I cannot hold that against him. He was just lucky." Sen. Kerry's anti-war activity, which included publicly throwing away some of his ribbons, has turned off some Democrats. Harold Lyles, who served in the Air Force during the Korean and Vietnam wars, said Sen. Kerry's actions disqualify him to be commander-in-chief. Even though Mr. Lyles is a Democrat, he said he will be voting for President Bush in November. "I do not like how (Sen. Kerry) will lead the country," said Mr. Lyles, now a real estate agent living near Dover. "I think he will take the country down the wrong path." State Sen. George H. Bunting, D-Bethany Beach, who fought in Vietnam as a member of the Marine Corps, endorsed Sen. Kerry earlier this year. Sen. Bunting has since rescinded his endorsement because of policy differences and what he feels is Sen. Kerry's negative attacks on President Bush. "I have a lot of misgivings about Sen. Kerry," said Sen. Bunting, who was awarded a Purple Heart. "My hang-up is not with his service or what he did once he got back." Sen. Bunting said President Bush's disputed stint in the National Guard does not bother him. "Both men served," he said. "They should be honored for their service." The FBI, closely tracking the anti-war movement in the 1970s, concluded John Kerry was a glib, moderate figure in a Vietnam veterans group that took a radical turn around the time he left it, documents show. The FBI file on Vietnam Veterans Against the War says the organization swung toward "militant and revolutionary-type activities" but accuses Sen. Kerry of little more than charisma. The bureau's more than four-year investigation of the organization - everything from its plots to pot luck suppers - is detailed in more than 9,000 pages released Wednesday under a Freedom of Information Act request from The Associated Press. An FBI summary of the anti-war protests Sen. Kerry helped organize in April 1971 says the decorated war hero "overshadowed" many of the organization's other leaders and was "a more popular and eloquent figure" than the rest. "Kerry was glib, cool, and displayed just what the moderate elements wanted to reflect," the summary says. The Associated Press and the Knight-Ridder News Service contributed to this article. Staff writer Joe Rogalsky can be reached at 741-8226 or jrogalsky@newszap.com ********************** It's commonly known that he lied about attrocities he said he saw in Vietnam commited by his fellow vets. IN FACT HE EVEN SAID THAT HE TOOK PART IN THEM THEREBY CALLING HIMSELF A WAR CRIMINAL. http://www.nationalreview.com/kob/kob200405050843.asp May 05, 2004, 8:43 a.m. Kate’s Take: Brothers Against Kerry By Kate O'Beirne On Tuesday morning, John Kerry's other, bigger, band of brothers visited Washington to announce that their Vietnam sibling is unfit to be commander-in-chief. According to its organizers, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth represents "the large majority" of those who served with Lieutenant Kerry on the Navy's Patrol Craft-Fast (PCF) vessels. Older, grayer, reluctant but determined, they remain a formidable force. A huge photograph of Lt.j.g. Kerry with 17 of his fellow officers stood to the side of the podium where about a dozen veterans spoke on behalf of the almost 200 who have signed a letter to Senator Kerry asking him to release his "complete and unaltered" military records. The newly organized group includes 12 of the officers who posed for that photograph 35 years ago. "We have been silent long enough," the letter declares. These Vietnam veterans have organized in 2004 to reclaim their reputations from the distortions and betrayal they believe they suffered at the hands their fellow swift-boat veteran in 1971. But for that shot of those handsome young men in uniform, this gathering of middle-aged men might be a Lion's Club meeting of local community leaders. These are the kind of men who quietly returned to those communities, with their medals and memories of honorable service, to resume their civilian lives. They quietly watched John Kerry make his claims about widespread atrocities in the "obscene memory" that was Vietnam. In a veteran-to-veteran face-off, John O'Neill engaged John Kerry in 1971, but the rest of these men were content to let the politicians and historians argue over the war and its aftermath. Until now. Capt. (Ret.) George Elliott explained that he hadn't "talked for 30 minutes in 25 years" about John Kerry's role in the antiwar movement. Andy Horne from Houston said that he was silent 35 years ago about John Kerry's allegations about atrocities, but vowed that he "won't be silent ever again." The passage of time has had little effect on the raw emotions of these gray-haired veterans. Former Lt. Robert Elder of Pennsylvania talked about the "deep sense of betrayal" he feels at the hands of a fellow naval officer. Cdr. (Ret.) Robert Brant from Michigan planned to head over to the Vietnam Memorial "to tell two of his old pals and the other 49 'Swifties' that they are still the best." Not a single one of these veterans witnessed any of the horrors John Kerry solemnly testified to before the Senate and assert that his oath obliged him to report alleged war crimes to his command. Rear Admiral (Ret.) Roy Hoffman, the chairman of the group, bluntly stated that the John Kerry who served in his command is unfit to command himself. He states that after four months and 12 days, with his "specious medals secure," Kerry "bugged out of Vietnam." As far as the admiral is concerned, "the real band of brothers are those who honorably and reliably stayed the course." Since their activities have hit the news, these Navy veterans are again taking incoming fire. Predictably, they are being accused of being partisan shills. In an ironic echo of the past, they're being dismissed as "bitter alcoholics." But, these men are determined to fight one more battle to salvage the reputations of the tens of thousands who served honorably. It's not about partisan politics they explain, it's a "veterans' issue." If the Democrats "had a fit choice for president we'd go home." They "do not want Senator Kerry to be commander-in-chief of our brave and honorable men." What of George Bush's controversial record in the National Guard? John O'Neill says that if his fellow Guardsmen have a problem with the president's service they ought to come forward. This group of veterans is raising specific objections to one specific veteran with whom they served. |
||
| May 9th, 2004 09:38 PM | |||
| GAsux |
I suppose I suppose you know the "vast majority" of Vietnam Vets are opposed to Kerry, and that they are oppossed for the exact reason you stated, based upon the extensive polling and research you've done on the subject? Since you've failed to remotely quantify it, I'm assuming you just didn't have time to document it right? I can certainly see how, as a Vietnam Vet, you'd want a seasoned combat veteran like George Bush, with a seasong combat veteran team with Cheney and Rumsfeld running the show over a long haired dirty communist loving hippy like John Kerry. |
||
| May 9th, 2004 08:57 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
"that he understands the hardships of war BECAUSE HE FOUGHT IN ONE and will be a more level-headed leader when it comes involving our country in one." - GLOW Yes, and the vast majority of other war veterans who fought in Vietnam think Kerry is a back stabbing fraud and I think their opinions should count just as much as Kerry's. In short, he's outnumbered on the Vietnam issue ......that he created I might add. |
||
| May 8th, 2004 02:56 PM | |||
| kellychaos | Alright Mr. Bush, I see your term of service in the Texas ANG and I'll raise you a silver star, a bronze star, and three purple hearts. | ||
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | |||
