Crossroads of a nation-Why we need Bush to win

PHEONIX?

0 Replies

About Dookie, Finn wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

How amusing to see someone who uses demonic and grotesque renderings of the photos of Bush cabinet members as their avatar lecture anyone on irrational political hatred.

I'll tell you something even more amusing, Finn: To hear an advocate of American conservatism casting aspersions on anyone because of "irrational political hatred"...is beyond amusing.

It is goddam hilarious.

And I thank you for the belly laugh...of which you have provided many recently.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

About Dookie, Finn wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
How amusing to see someone who uses demonic and grotesque renderings of the photos of Bush cabinet members as their avatar lecture anyone on irrational political hatred.

I'll tell you something even more amusing, Finn: To hear an advocate of American conservatism casting aspersions on anyone because of "irrational political hatred"...is beyond amusing.

It is goddam hilarious.

And I thank you for the belly laugh...of which you have provided many recently.

See, it didn't take years to make you laugh Frank. I'm so pleased.

You are right, as usual, all of American conservatism is steeped in irrational political hatred.

I don't know why I even try to respond to these insightful comments.

0 Replies

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
About Dookie, Finn wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
How amusing to see someone who uses demonic and grotesque renderings of the photos of Bush cabinet members as their avatar lecture anyone on irrational political hatred.

I'll tell you something even more amusing, Finn: To hear an advocate of American conservatism casting aspersions on anyone because of "irrational political hatred"...is beyond amusing.

It is goddam hilarious.

And I thank you for the belly laugh...of which you have provided many recently.

See, it didn't take years to make you laugh Frank. I'm so pleased.

You are right, as usual, all of American conservatism is steeped in irrational political hatred.

Well...I didn't say "all"...but I understand your need to alter what people say in order to have your posts make even a little bit of sense...so do go for it.

In any case...since American conservatism spent the eight years of the Clinton Administration indulging in some of the most irrational political hatred I've personally ever observed...and since in their frantic attempt to keep a moron in office they are indulging in plenty right now...

...I think the A2K people with a brain got the point I was trying to make.

Quote:

I don't know why I even try to respond to these insightful comments.

Considering how inane some of your responses end up, Finn...I don't know why either.

Anyone else out there know why?

C'mon, Finn can use some help here.

0 Replies

georgia brown wrote:

you dont need to read right wing prop. just read his record and you'l see he is unfit for command.

That has to be what the US military thought. They gave the guy three purple hearts to get rid of him after two months on swiftboat duty. Nobody EARNS three purple hearts in two months.

0 Replies

I still haven't heard from any of the Kerry supporters, why they are not curious as to why Kerry refuses to release all of his military files. They prefer to spout the Democrat talking points, instead of trying to understand why Kerry became the enemy of a vast majority of Vets. The Democrats have done a good job of reviving the Vietnam mentality of the VVAW. They have done such a good job of turning the war today into another war to be protested.

Instead of recognizing what Kerry really is about they should know that what Kerry said and did, still comes back to haunt us (all of us, vet or not) and this undermines anything we are trying to do. A big part of the distrust and the hate for the military actions is because of Kerry and the Democrat leadership today... I have posted on several occasions that I voted for Clinton and Gore, I am not a republican. It is meant to be an insult to call anyone "republican" if you have a different view on Kerry or the war today... They are like brick walls, living in a time warp!!

By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Morning Editor
June 23, 2004

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200406\NAT20040623b.html

Quote:
(CNSNews.com) - A Republican lawmaker says Sen. John F. Kerry should apologize for his 1971 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The Vietnamese government is now using Kerry's 1971 comments to question America's treatment of Iraqi prisoners.

In a one-minute speech on the House floor Wednesday, Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Penn.) noted that the Vietnamese government has weighed in on the Iraqi prison scandal.

"But the official communist Vietnamese news agency isn't citing the Geneva Convention or the U.N.," Pitts said. "It's citing testimony given by John Kerry in 1971."

At that 1971 hearing, Kerry told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about a recent investigation in Detroit, where more than 150 Vietnam veterans "testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia -- not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command...."

According to Kerry, some of the 150 veterans admitted they "had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam..."

Vietnam News, which the Republican National Committee describes as an arm of the official Communist Vietnam News Agency, is now repeating John Kerry's 1971 comments to make the point that Americans "perpetrated well-documented atrocities in Vietnam, both at the individual and mass levels."

But, Vietnam News added, "despite these abuses, the Vietnamese did not reciprocate in kind; instead, they treated captured US troops humanely."

Rep. Pitts says there's a problem with Kerry's 1971 testimony, which Vietnam News has seized upon: "The problem is, he relied on a report prepared by a group of people who were not what they seemed," Pitts said in his speech.

"They claimed to be former soldiers. They were not. They were frauds. They were out only to discredit the military and our country. But John Kerry never repudiated or apologized for his statements," Pitts said. Instead, Pitts noted, Kerry attributed his behavior to "youth."

"And now his misleading, inaccurate, hateful words are being used by a government with an atrocious human rights record against this country," Pitts said.

"Senator Kerry should apologize once and for all to our troops and to our nation...And he should disavow these statements as false before more nations decide to rely on his erroneous testimony from 1971," Pitts concluded.

In an April 23, 2004 interview with CNN, Kerry said his 1971 comments were "mostly voice of a young, angry person who wanted to end the war" and "honest expressions of the passion that we brought to the cause."

He told CNN he regretted "any feeling that anybody had that I somehow didn't embrace the quality of the service. But I have always said how nobly I think every veteran served."

He described himself as older and wiser: "But they were the words that came out of my gut at that time, based on the anger and frustration that I felt back when it was happening," Kerry told CNN in April.

He also told CNN, "I'm not going to back down one inch on what I've fought for and what I've stood for all of these years." =======================================

0 Replies

Anyone who uses CNS as a source has zero credibility. Bush voters are largely misinformed as they constantly watch and read right-wing propaganda and beleive it. It is frightening to think that a disaster like Bush can atract this much support.

Kerry has allowed media access to all his files. The right-wing liars keep harping about this but no one cares except the Busheeple.

0 Replies

Harper wrote:

Bush voters are largely misinformed as they constantly watch and read right-wing propaganda and beleive it.

This is a link from a web site posted by Squinny on another thread http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=36913&highlight=

The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters
Steven Kull Principle Investigator 10/21/04
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/Report10_21_04.pdf

It is a survey conducted by a social science research institute out of the University of Maryland. I am not totally in agreement with its conclusions. I think they go beyond their data into speculation, but it is still interesting and informative.

0 Replies

When all else fails, call it illegitamate.. Kerry paraded around with people who called themselves Veterans, but weren't. He also had people who testified about atrocities, but never were there. Kerry is just a fraud.

FYI.. CSN was reported on this interview on CNN.

CNN) -- The strong, vivid words John Kerry uttered 33 years ago continue to ring through time.

Back in 1971, the square-jawed, clean-cut decorated combat veteran, with a generous mop of dark hair, told a rapt audience of senators of atrocities he said had been reported to him by his fellow soldiers in Vietnam.

Rapes. Razed villages. Ears and heads cut off. Random shootings of civilians. Bodies blown up. Wires from portable telephones taped to genitals, with the power then turned on. Food stocks poisoned. Dogs and cats shot for the fun of it.

"We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own memories of that service as easily as this administration has wiped their memories," Kerry told members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in testimony that made him a national figure at 27.

To those who were against the war, he was a courageous hero standing up for the truth; to those who supported it, he was a treasonous pariah aiding the enemy.

But no matter how his words were viewed, their power was beyond question. Even President Nixon groused about him in the Oval Office.

"John was able to speak to people, whether they were conservative or liberal, Democrat or Republican, and people listened," said Lenny Rotman, who worked with Kerry back then in the group Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

Today, more than three decades after making those charges, Kerry is the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, fighting a close campaign during a time of war, putting his resume as a Vietnam hero front and center.

At 60, the hair is graying, though the jaw is still square. And he is still explaining and defending those strong, vivid words, which continue to divide.

"I think the way I characterized it at that time was mostly the voice of a young, angry person who wanted to end the war," Kerry told CNN's Candy Crowley in an interview broadcast on Thursday's anniversary of his Senate testimony.

"I regret any feeling that anybody had that I somehow didn't embrace the quality of the service. But I have always said how nobly I think every veteran served."

The senator concedes he wouldn't say the same things in the same way today, that talk of "atrocities" back then was over the top. Yet, he insists he's still proud he stood up against the war. While he has regret for the words he chose, he defends the legitimacy of the sentiment he so starkly articulated.

"They were honest expressions of the passion that we brought to the cause," said Kerry. "I'm older, I'm wiser. I'm farther from it. But they were the words that came out of my gut at that time, based on the anger and frustration that I felt back when it was happening."

He also told Crowley, "I'm not going to back down one inch on what I've fought for and what I've stood for all of these years."

Such qualified regret doesn't go far enough for some Vietnam veterans, who can't forgive the stigma they still see attached to those long-ago words.

"He was the father of the lie that the Vietnam veteran was a rapist, a baby killer, a drug addict and the like," said John O'Neill, who served in the same Navy patrol unit where Kerry served and who sparred with him on national TV during the tumult of 1971. "I don't think there's anybody that did that, or created that, more than Kerry." (Fellow vet blasts Kerry's antiwar comments)

0 Replies

Good try. McCain wants to be President. He's working both sides of the coin hoping he'll have a clean sweep in '08. I'm surprised you can't see that. Dragging out the McCain card is another favorite of the Left..

McCain is not held in high regard amoung some Vietnam Vets either. Even though he was a POW. His working with Kerry on establishing relations with Vietnam is not something they hold in high regard..... Him wanting to "put it behind him" has resulted in an unholy alliance on the issue of Vietnam...

The Boston Globe
Vietnam duality challenges Kerry
War emphasis grows thornier
By Patrick Healy, Globe Staff | September 6, 2004

John F. Kerry had a choice to make about Vietnam.

ADVERTISEMENT

It was 2002 and the historian Douglas Brinkley was on the top floor of Kerry's Boston townhouse, leafing through his Vietnam War diaries. The senator paced nearby. Brinkley had first approached Kerry to talk to him for a book on veterans-turned-senators but became intrigued by the idea of using this former Navy officer who had turned antiwar activist to explore the split personality of Vietnam.

For his part, Kerry was planning to run for the presidency, and according to aides, he thought a book about his decorated tour of duty -- written by a credible biographer -- might impress voters seeking a strong leader.

Now Kerry's record of military service in Vietnam and his opposition to the war afterward have become the single biggest challenge he has faced in his campaign for the presidency.

Four years ago, Kerry was warned about the perils of emphasizing Vietnam in his candidacy by his friend John McCain, a former POW whose White House bid in 2000 was damaged by angry veterans who said McCain had "abandoned" them in the Senate. The role Kerry and McCain played in normalizing US-Vietnam relations was still controversial with many veterans, McCain told him. Vietnam divided the nation in the 1960s and '70s, and the wounds have not healed.

Kerry was torn over cooperating on the book. Brinkley seemed fair from what Kerry had read of his past work. Friends had vouched for him. Yet this was Vietnam. Brinkley wanted total access to all of Kerry's uncensored, wartime reflections -- the words of an increasingly disillusioned young officer that could still be viewed as intemperate by the public. Just seeing those pages in Brinkley's hands caused Kerry to ask an aide to monitor the author as he worked. "What are you touching?" Kerry asked during one pause, Brinkley recalled.

"Kerry was very reluctant to spend the time with me to relive his past," Brinkley said recently. "But he knew Vietnam would be an issue in the presidential race. It always was in his Senate races. My book was a huge gamble. I knew he hadn't sanitized his collection because he was so nervous as I read it. Vietnam could cut for good or ill."

So it has. Kerry allowed Brinkley to write the book with no restrictions, and the result, "Tour of Duty," both burnished Kerry's reputation as a fighter and infuriated some veterans who felt misrepresented or maligned. The book has been a double-edged sword, like so much about that war in this race. Kerry used Vietnam as the defining example of his leadership skills during the first seven months of 2004 -- culminating in a strategically planned pageant of war remembrance at July's Democratic convention -- only to see his war service overshadow his political message and spark a roiling crisis for his candidacy as the race enters the homestretch

0 Replies

of the coin hoping he'll have a clean sweep in '08. I'm surprised you can't see that. Dragging out the McCain card is another favorite of the Left..

Xena wrote:

Good try. McCain wants to be President. He's working both sides
McCain is not held in high regard amoung some Vietnam Vets either. Even though he was a POW. His working with Kerry on establishing relations with Vietnam is not something they hold in high regard..... Him wanting to "put it behind him" has resulted in an unholy alliance on the issue of Vietnam...
Quote:
Quote:

Hey Armyvet35--Read this statement and then you can understand why some question Xena's connection to reality...5 1/2 years this man spent in a Vietnam POW camp and now he's using it as a bid to be President? She has no shame....and i have NO RESPECT for anything she says...and to support this kind of BS...All decent Americans should be aghast at this statement.

0 Replies

Crossroads of a nation-Why we need Bush to NOT win

http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/ChRecon.html

First, the Reconstructionists find themselves as a part of a greater class of religions, dominionists. The dominionist is fully committed to the manifestation of a society here on earth both defined as and controlled by Christians. The dominionist assumes the responsibility of asserting this society and maintaining it. What sets the dominionist apart from the rest -- assuming that all religious would like to live in a society entirely committed to their own beliefs -- is the demand of the dominionist to command this society. Reconstructionists seek the establishment of an order not unlike the example given to man through Moses by God thousands of years ago. The example of the charge of man by God to have dominion over all the earth is critical to their ideas. Since no piece of Scripture appearing after that charge in Genesis contradicts this statement, man has no choice but try to take control. Rushdoony calls this charge the "moral obligation of Christians to recapture every institution for Christ" (Barron, 23). After recognizing that this charge is essentially the thesis of Rushdoony's 800 page Institutions of Biblical Law, the importance of this ideal to the activity of the movement can be understood. Not to be confused with the ideas of the Kingdom Now movement, Reconstructionists do not believe that the establishment of the Kingdom has already occurred, but that the realization of this order should occur before Christ's return.

The idea of dominion to Reconstructionsts is very comprehensive in scope. It asks the goal of dominion to control all aspects of life from the individual to the state. The manifestation of this order is the fulfillment of God's will.

Secondly, the ideas of the group are widely grounded in a few basic theoretical assumptions. Reconstructionists believe in Biblical Law, that is to say, the validity of Scripture ought to be taken for its entirety or none of it. Reconstructionists claim to be the only people who judge the importance of the law true. While recognizing the New Testament's laws of love and covenant, the group still asserts the dominance of the laws of the Old Testament concerning moral and civil issues. After all, the God of the Old Testament times is still the same unchangeable God of today. Reconstructionists go as far as praising the practice of the Puritans concerning the law. With regard to the interpretation of both the meaning and usefulness of Scripture, reconstructionists favor a return to fundamentalism.

The second theoretical perspective which must be honored when studying the Reconstructionist movement is Postmillenialism. Stated simply, postmillennialism asserts the theory that Christ's return will come not before the establishment of the utopia. The essential statement that the "post" implies a prior action immediately separates the movement from other more prominent evangelical movements. Some have criticized the Reconstructionists for a lack of foresight and foolish confidence since the basis of Christ's return is on fallible man's efforts. However, the Reconstructionists gain their confidence from the predestination ideas of Calvinism. That is, God's will shall be accomplished no matter the environment of opposition. The group also credits its confidence to the fact of Christ's resurrection as a climax. The victory of Christ's resurrection, Reconstructionist faith asserts, cannot be followed by anything less glorious, especially failure.

The movement approaches the advent of the ideal society in a very patient manner. They are confident that God will win, just no time soon. Therefore, the reconstructionist need not engage in active social rebellion. Simply, the movement attempts to gain ground where possible, and then, offer resistance to opposition, thereby protecting the gain so far. A perpetual commitment to combat evil in all forms on the individual level will eventually turn the tide of the oppression. So, there is no sense of urgency concerning the timeframe of establishing the ideal society, much less a sense at all of violently overturning greater political or social spheres.

See link provided for further understanding.

0 Replies

willow_tl wrote:

Xena wrote:
Good try. McCain wants to be President. He's working both sides of the coin hoping he'll have a clean sweep in '08. I'm surprised you can't see that. Dragging out the McCain card is another favorite of the Left..

McCain is not held in high regard amoung some Vietnam Vets either. Even though he was a POW. His working with Kerry on establishing relations with Vietnam is not something they hold in high regard..... Him wanting to "put it behind him" has resulted in an unholy alliance on the issue of Vietnam...

Hey Armyvet35--Read this statement and then you can understand why some question Xena's connection to reality...5 1/2 years this man spent in a Vietnam POW camp and now he's using it as a bid to be President? She has no shame....and i have NO RESPECT for anything she says...and to support this kind of BS...All decent Americans should be aghast at this statement.

Who's reality is in question? Where did I ever say he is using his years in a POW camp as a bid to be President? You must have a problem reading or comprehending posts. I did say he is playing both sides, because he wants to be President. I did say some Vets are still angry with him because his affiliation with Kerry on the Vietnam issue.

Pulling out the McCain card IS what you all do.. You have no respect for yourself if you have to twist peoples words to make a point. You show again and again who is the master Bullsh*ter here..

0 Replies

mesquite wrote:

The part from the SBVFT ad is in red.

Quote:
I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.

It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit, the emotions in the room, the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam, but they did. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, tape wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

Thanks for providing the link Mesquite, but I don't think it helps your case much. Your excerpt, IMO, appears more damning than the one you highlighted as misleading. I used blue to emphasize why.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
About Dookie, Finn wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
How amusing to see someone who uses demonic and grotesque renderings of the photos of Bush cabinet members as their avatar lecture anyone on irrational political hatred.

I'll tell you something even more amusing, Finn: To hear an advocate of American conservatism casting aspersions on anyone because of "irrational political hatred"...is beyond amusing.

It is goddam hilarious.

And I thank you for the belly laugh...of which you have provided many recently.

See, it didn't take years to make you laugh Frank. I'm so pleased.

You are right, as usual, all of American conservatism is steeped in irrational political hatred.

Well...I didn't say "all"...but I understand your need to alter what people say in order to have your posts make even a little bit of sense...so do go for it.

In any case...since American conservatism spent the eight years of the Clinton Administration indulging in some of the most irrational political hatred I've personally ever observed...and since in their frantic attempt to keep a moron in office they are indulging in plenty right now...

...I think the A2K people with a brain got the point I was trying to make.

Quote:
I don't know why I even try to respond to these insightful comments.

Considering how inane some of your responses end up, Finn...I don't know why either.

Anyone else out there know why?

C'mon, Finn can use some help here.

You rang? :wink: My guess would be because he's perplexed by the idea that someone as clearly intelligent as you would stand on a soapbox and insist only brainless people disagree with you. Perhaps he, like me, wonders why you don't put your brain to better use. Unlike some folks you speak for, you are not limited to that tactic, so it probably strikes him as oddly out of place when you employ it. Just a thought.

0 Replies

Quote:

Pulling out the McCain card IS what you all do.. You have no respect for yourself if you have to twist peoples words to make a point. You show again and again who is the master Bullsh*ter here..

It was YOUR quote...I recommend 5 mg of Haldol, we used to give it to all active psychotics...I don't have to twist your BS you do enough twisting on your own...enjoy the sleep with the haldol.. Laughing

0 Replies

"Good try."

Patronizing responses always impress me.

" McCain wants to be President."

Well, DUH!

" He's working both sides of the coin hoping he'll have a clean sweep in '08."

Bush showed him how effective this tactic is.

" I'm surprised you can't see that."
Feigning surprise...while batting eyelashes...Little ol' me?

"Dragging out the McCain card is another favorite of the Left.. "

The most effective cards are always the favorite cards. McCain stands for everything(almost) that makes this country great.

"McCain is not held in high regard amoung some Vietnam Vets either."

Neither is Mother Theresa, but I'm not losing any sleep over it.

"Even though he was a POW."

Check and checkmate?

"His working with Kerry on establishing relations with Vietnam is not something they hold in high regard....."

Maybe not but the people who I regard are impressed.

" Him wanting to "put it behind him" has resulted in an unholy alliance on the issue of Vietnam."

It's obvious you disdained reading the article I linked to or you could not honestly say that...but I could be wrong...

0 Replies

Quote:

I don't know why I even try to respond to these insightful comments.

Me neither. But you do anyway, finn.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Quote:
200,000 vets filed a petition asking him for his records, he declines
If he is so proud of his service why will he not do that simple thing?
Interesting, 200,000 veteran's names on a petition is not considered significant to some. And the question is skipped over as somehow invalid. Far easier to attack the persons posing the question I suppose.

Bill, those 200,000 are the swift boat veterans for truth. Since we've been round and round about their accusations and connections to the Republican campaign, I think most are tired of challenging that. Hence it gets ignored.

I think that maybe some of the hostility in this thread (which seems to have cooled) is just exhaustion. Armyvet and Xena have their take on things, but it really isn't anything that hasn't already been beaten to death on this forum, and I think those that have lost their patience on this thread have done so for that reason. That's no excuse. I don't like it much when I hear one member tell another they have no business on this forum -- as I've had it said to me as well. All views are welcome.

So, for anyone who is tired of refuting old swiftvet charges, you can just link to this: http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=32213&highlight=

Likewise if anyone has anything new to add to that thread, feel free.

0 Replies

Crossroads of a nation-Why we need Bush to win

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know