The Whimpire Strikes Back

Baldimo wrote:

kickycan wrote:
Baldimo wrote:
How is it that the commanders have no credibility but the people who served with him do? Could it be because you don't want to know the truth of the matter? I think this is the case. Of course none of this would be happening if Kerry wouldn't have talked it so much, and used it as a case for his non-election.

Could it be that you want so badly to believe them because of your own bias? Hmmm...think about it.

I might be biased but I have to tell you that I beleive them because there are so many of them. It is easier to beleive the word 11 or 12 people over the word of 8 or 9. It is also easier to do because they were responsible for his orders and his missions. They were the leadership not the men in the boat.

So you are taking the word of the majority, who weren't actually there when this all took place, who also are obviously holding a grudge over the things that he said after he got home, and most of whom didn't even serve in the same outfit with him, over the stories of the guys who were actually in the boat and with him. Because there are more of them.

Thank you, now I understand perfectly. Laughing

0 Replies

Baldimo wrote:

I might be biased but I have to tell you that I beleive them because there are so many of them. It is easier to beleive the word 11 or 12 people over the word of 8 or 9. It is also easier to do because they were responsible for his orders and his missions. They were the leadership not the men in the boat.

And last time I checked, we were electing someone to lead, not to be lead.

(Hmm. The english language is a curious beast...)

0 Replies

Hi BHF. 'tis.

Just saw this in the paper, wonder if this is what was really behind the ad, which was a little out of character IMO for MoveOn:

Quote:

Senator John Kerry denounced an advertisement by the liberal group MoveOn.org questioning President Bush's Vietnam-era service in the Air National Guard yesterday, a move likely to raise pressure on President Bush to condemn a recent commercial accusing Mr. Kerry of lying about his war record.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/18/politics/campaign/18ads.html

0 Replies

Baldimo wrote:

George Soros is the guy who puts forward all or most of their money. This coming from a guy who thinks the whole world should be socialist, and him it's leader.

Soros? Wanting the whole world to be socialist?

I know he's been critical of the excesses of capitalism (even after having grown rich off them himself), wrote a book about it and all - but he's also the guy who funded almost every democratic movement in the former communist states, when the old regimes started crumbling. Authoritarian communists and ex-communists across the region hate him. Milosevic hated him. Lukashenka hates him, Iliescu, Meciar, all the red-brown coalitions that sprung up through the nineties - they hate him.

Whenever some neo-communist clamped down on the media - he'd fund a free alternative. Whenever some corrupt former apparatchik tried to suppress dissent - he'd fund the dissident groups. Whenever some ex-communist tried to shore up his waning popularity by lashing out against some ethnic minority - he'd support minority NGOs. Young talented students from countries where the universities are hamstrung by the state's grip - thanks to Soros, they get to study at the CEU, do independent research.

You can say what you want about him, but throughout the tenuous time of post-communist democratic reform, Soros stepped in to support, it sometimes seems, almost every independent journalist, corruption monitor, ethnic reconciliation project, etc., there was. Without him, who knows how much more power the "red-brown" coalition of ex-communists and rabble-rousing xenophobes might have grabbed still.

0 Replies

The Whimpire Strikes Back

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know