posted on April 21, 2004 03:53:16 PM new
The Bush Campaign has violated every standard of decency by attacking John Kerry's military service. The fact is they're terrified of running against John Kerry's war record. And so they're desperately doing everything they can to try to tear it down. Bush and his campaign people are VERY NASTY PEOPLE. They will say anything and do anything to win. Take a minute and compare the Bush military record and Kerry's record.
posted on April 21, 2004 03:56:54 PM new
I really love the way they completely ignore Kerry's request to debate the issues with Bush. They know that Bush wouldn't stand a chance--in fact he'd be jhust plain embarrassing.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
'We have dispatched Dr. David Kay...to search for the bio-warfare agents we believe hidden in Senator Kerry's forehead. If Senator Kerry has used botox as part of a wrinkle enrichment program, he is in violation of UN Resolution 752. Upon receiving Dr. Kay's report, the weapons of mass destruction that Senator Kerry so adamantly insists do not exist...may well be above his very nose.'" --Dick Cheney when asked whether John Kerry has had Botox treaments
posted on April 21, 2004 09:29:08 PM new
The fact remains. Kerry has challenged the President to an open debate, and Mr. Bush so far has not taken up the challenge. His words the other night in response to a fairly simple question, having to do with the lessons learned from 9/11...
I wish you'd have given me this written question ahead of time so I could plan for it.
...speak volumes about why the man will never be able to face an oponent and debate issues using his own knowledge and wisdom. Without his handlers telling him what to say, the President is a blank slate. Our leader is a puppet. A marionette. Howdy effing Doody.
posted on April 21, 2004 09:35:04 PM new
Explain to me why Bush has to debate Kerry? He hasn't been nominated as the Democratic Candaditate for President. At least the last time I checked. What happens if someone else more qualified to run for the Democratic President appears then what? If Kerry can knock Bush then I think Bush can attack Kerry. Where does it say Democrats are right. 50% are for him & 50% are against him so why push the liberal thinking on the conservatives.
Yes, bigpeepa we can tell you don't like the Republicans and you are just trying to stir up problems. This leads to he said she said and then the shouting begins and the name calling starts. See you just called the Bush people NASTY.
We have been having the Kerry Bush Military record for a while now and when Kerry was on Meet the Press a while ago he stated that he would give out his military record, which he didn't until now because of the heat he was taking. Bush did his right away.
posted on April 21, 2004 09:54:28 PM new
Lets see....... Kerry was on Meet the Press on Sunday and released the records last evening.... 2 days later. That's fairly quick, considering that they had to make sure everything was in order.
posted on April 21, 2004 09:58:27 PM new
I've read where President Bush has said he's looking forward to debating kerry. I agree with Libra....kerry hasn't even received the official nomination yet.
And Cheryl's guy, Mr. K, is still hanging in there. Then there's still 6+ months to go. Haven't seen kerry take many positions himself yet....just a lot of whining about what he thinks this President is doing wrong so far.
He's already revised the programs he was promising at the beginning of his campaign....once it was pointed out his 'math' wasn't working out very well for paying for all of them. LOL
Maybe at some point, we'll see his new list of all the programs he's promising....with their cost, even though he never gave us the cost of the ones he's revised already. LOL
It will be a lot easier for kerry to debate the issues once he decides which side of the issues he's really on. LOL
posted on April 21, 2004 10:02:57 PM new Explain to me why Bush has to debate Kerry?
Why shouldn't he? Debates allow the public to hear their candidates speak on the issues, giving their reasoning, answering serious questions...
...oh, wait.
You're right, Bush should absolutely not debate Kerry. He can't do any of those things. He does read well from a teleprompter, but can hardly string two sentences together with problems when speaking extemporaneously. He rarely answers questions--either he simply can't, or he instead gives a campaign speech (previously written of course). As for his reasoning skills, the less said the better.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on April 21, 2004 10:03:10 PM newKerry was on Meet the Press on Sunday and released the records last evening.... 2 days later. That's fairly quick, considering that they had to make sure everything was in order.
Uh no....he had been asked to release them a long time ago. And he didn't release them all either. Until....it was noted some were missing.
It took Bush 4 years to release his?
Uh....no....again. We went through this four years ago....just another democrat rehash...like most things are.
posted on April 21, 2004 10:08:27 PM new
:: Explain to me why Bush has to debate Kerry? ::
Because debates are an age old tradition of politics where the public is abble to see hear and compare candidates on their owns merit and on an equal playing field.
It's not just about the topics, it is also about seeing how someone thinks on their feet, how they deal with pressure and the unknown etc.
Tell me this Libra - why should Bush nnot partake in a an aspect of the political process as old as politics itself? Why does he deserve a hall pass for this one?
Oh, and they records, Bush ws president for three years before they were all made public so lets not get too high and mighty about Kerry taking two days (BTW- When did Sunday become "a while ago"?)
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 21, 2004 10:26:52 PM new
As the election draws closer I know we'll be hearing more vets come forward like this one:
taken from CNN 4-21-04
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A man who served in the same Navy unit as Sen. John Kerry denounced on Tuesday charges the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee made as an antiwar protester that he and other U.S. troops committed atrocities in Vietnam.
"I saw some war heroes...John Kerry is not a war hero," said John O'Neill, a Houston lawyer who joined the Navy's Coastal Division 11 two months after the future senator left Vietnam. "He couldn't tie the shoes of some of the people in Coastal Division 11."
In a related development, the Kerry campaign said Tuesday it would post all of the Massachusetts senator's Navy records on its Web site, after the Boston Globe reported that the campaign refused to provide access to some records, despite Kerry's pledge on Sunday to let reporters see them.
In an interview Tuesday on CNN's "Wolf Blitzer Reports," O'Neill said allegations about atrocities made by Kerry after his return render him "unfit" to be president.
"His allegations that people committed war crimes in that unit, and throughout Vietnam, were lies. He knew they were lies when he said them, and they were very damaging lies," said O'Neill, adding that other former sailors from the same unit also plan to come forward to take on Kerry, whose Vietnam service has figured prominently in his campaign for the White House.
This past weekend, Kerry said that his use of the word "atrocity" in a 1971 interview was "inappropriate," and he added that he never intended to cast a negative light on the sailors with whom he served.
Speaking on NBC's "Meet The Press," Kerry said Sunday, "The words were honest, but, on the other hand, they were a little bit over the top."
Asked whether Kerry's expressions of regret were sufficient, O'Neill pointed to the fact that Kerry on Sunday characterized his 1971 charges as "a little bit excessive."
"It's really not a matter of forgiveness. It's a matter of fitness to be the commander-in-chief of all U.S. forces," he told Blitzer. "The damaging lies that he told about war criminals have haunted people's entire lives. So it's just a little bit late, in the course of a presidential campaign, to say it's a bit excessive."
Responding to O'Neill's comments, Michael Meehan, a senior Kerry campaign adviser, said "his characterization of John Kerry's service is inaccurate."
Meehan said Kerry has "apologized for some of his word choices."
"He was a young man who came back, had seen a lot in Vietnam, wanted this country to end that war and came back worked very hard to bring that war to an end," Meehan said.
"Mr. O'Neill has certainly earned his right, through his service, to speak whatever he wants and have his opinions," Meehan said. "We would disagree with some of his characterizations. Sen. Kerry volunteered to go to Vietnam. ... [He] won a Silver Star for bravery, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts leading that division."
After returning from Vietnam, Kerry became a leader in the group Vietnam Veterans Against the War. In 1971, he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, accusing President Nixon of prolonging the war and charging that fellow service members had committed war crimes.
Among the charges he lodged were that troops had committed rapes; cut off ears, limbs and heads; taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals; blown up bodies; and randomly fired at civilians.
An incensed Nixon encouraged O'Neill, who was awarded two Bronze Stars in Vietnam, to challenge Kerry, which he did in a debate on the "Dick Cavett Show."
At one point during the heated exchange, O'Neill, an admiral's son, demanded Kerry explain why, if he saw war crimes taking place, "you didn't do something about them."
Since then, O'Neill has largely remained out of the spotlight as Kerry's political star rose in Massachusetts and then nationally, turning down what he said were more than 50 requests -- many from Kerry's political opponents -- to come forward on television.
"I haven't been on television in many, many years. I had very little political involvement," said O'Neill, who described himself as a political Independent in a phone interview last month with the Houston Chronicle.
But O'Neill said Tuesday that he and the others who served with Kerry -- who "would much rather have nothing to do with this" -- feel they have "no choice" but to come forward, which he said would dispel the notion that Vietnam veterans as a group are supportive of Kerry's candidacy.
"We were there, we know the truth, and we know that this guy's unfit to be commander-in-chief," said O'Neill, who took over command of Kerry's boat after he left. "I think you'll find that people are very, very angry at John Kerry. They remember his career in Vietnam as a short, controversial one, and they believe that only Hollywood could turn this guy into a war hero."
On Sunday, Kerry was also asked by "Meet the Press" moderator Tim Russert whether he would release all of his military service records from Vietnam, following President Bush's decision to make public all of his records from his years in the Texas National Guard. Kerry said reporters could come to his campaign headquarters to view the records but he did not plan to release them.
But Tuesday, the Boston Globe reported that when one of its reporters took the Kerry campaign up on that offer, the journalist was told that access would only be provided to records already released by the campaign, not the senator's entire Navy file.
With Republicans poised to criticize Kerry for not releasing all of his military records, the campaign decided Tuesday afternoon to post the records on its Web site to diffuse the issue. They are expected to be available by Wednesday evening. "John Kerry has a record in the military that he's running on, not from," Meehan said. "Everything the U.S. Navy sent to Sen. Kerry, we'll post on the Web site."
posted on April 21, 2004 10:33:52 PM new
It is hard to admit it at any time, but most especially when we find ourselves in another war. But the plain fact of the matter is that US military did commit atrocities in Vietnam--and in past wars as well. No, not every soldier did so, but they did occur. Refusing to face that fact doesn't change the facts.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on April 21, 2004 10:51:58 PM new
Then if Bush has to debate Kerry, He will have to debate Edwards, Kucinek, or any person in the running for the democratic nomination for President. Just because he won the primaries doesn't mean that someone else won't be nominated. When and If Kerry is the Democratic Nomination for President then I am sure there will be debates as in previous years between the CANDIDATES. That is why. It is just wasted time to do it now. There is much more pressing issues to take care of.
Taken from Meet the Press last Sunday.
MR. RUSSERT: But you'll make all your records public.
SEN. KERRY: They are. People can come and see them at headquarters and take a look at them. I'm not going to--but I'll tell you this. I'm proud of my service. I'm proud of what we did. I know what happened. And the Navy 35 years ago made a decision and it's the Navy's decision and I think it was the right decision.
But they weren't. His Military record was not public for the public to read until today. Please reread the transcript from Meet the press from Sunday. At that time he was not asked to publish his Military record but he was asked a while ago, Bush did his, he didn't do his until all the talk about his 3 Purple Hearts.
posted on April 21, 2004 10:56:35 PM new
Oh, please. Bush did every thing he possibly could to avoid publishing his records. And they stillshow he disappeared forseveralmonths. The only reason he got an honorable discharge was becasue he "made up" enough hours in one month to get the required hours.
"Make up" time? What, are we talking about grade school? This is the way the National Guard was run during the Vietnam War? People were ableto just wander away for months at a time, then "make up" the time later?!?
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on April 21, 2004 11:12:04 PM new
Wednesday, April 21, 2004
WASHINGTON – Sen. John Kerry has quickly reneged on his promise to release his full military and medical records to public scrutiny.
Kerry emphatically told Tim Russert on NBC's “Meet the Press” last weekend that “people” could come on down to his campaign headquarters to eyeball his full file of military records.
“They’re available to you to come and look at. People can come and see them at headquarters and take a look at them,” Kerry told Russert.
Russert had asked Kerry if he would release his complete file, as President Bush did after Democrats raised questions about his service in the Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.
Kerry shot back to Russert’s request, “They are” – indicating the records were already released.
But Kerry has not realeased all his military records, only a small portion, and placed strict limitations on their examination.
This week several individuals and organizations, including NewsMax, followed up on Kerry’s open invitation.
When the media asked to take advantage of Kerry’s offer, however, Kerry's press spokesman Michael Meehan announced that the only records available would be those already released to the Boston Globe.
But the famously pro-Kerry Globe has pointed out that Kerry has never disclosed his full military and medical file to it.
The newspaper reported Tuesday that “the day after John F. Kerry said he would make all of his military records available for inspection at his campaign headquarters, a spokesman said the senator would not release any new documents, leaving undisclosed many of Kerry's evaluations by his Navy commanding officers, some medical records, and possibly other material.”
posted on April 21, 2004 11:25:32 PM new
Libra - what the hell are you talking about?
1) Primaries dictate the delegate count at the national convention so unless unless Kerry dies between now and then or every deleggate goes rogue and decides to shirk their responsibility then yes, Kerry is the nominee.
2) Presidential debates do not take place until after the conventions when Kerry will officially be he nominee.
BTW - I must have some top secret cleaance cookies on my computer cause I had no problem downloading the PDF file from his website.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
Glad to notice Dennis is still hanging in there. The reason for it is quite simple. He's trying to keep the Democratic party on track and he's trying to keep the issues that Dems care about in the forefront. He knows all too well what happens at election time. Promises get forgotten, issues get put on the back burner and special interest groups start to nudge their way in. Dennis is sticking around to make sure that doesn't happen. Which proves all the more that he cares about the people in this country. He could be taking this time to protect his congressional seat, which would require a lot less travel and a lot more relaxation time (he's still running for another term in Congress), but he's not. I admire his spirit and conviction more now than I ever have. If you've noticed, Dennis does not hem and haw about his past and he does not waiver on the issues.
That aside, it's getting close to the time that everyone, repub and dem alike, needs to take long, hard looks at the issues on the table. Everyone needs to decide what is best for him or herself and their families. I advise my children to make a list of things they feel are wrong and need to be fixed. What issues do they think need tending to? Once they've created that list, they need to listen to each candidate and decide which one will better address their needs and the needs of everyone in this country. We've gone beyond the terrorism issue. For almost three years, that's been close to being the sole concern of this administration. Other issues have gone unaddressed and that has hurt us tremendously. It is possible to address the war on terrorism and to take care of the other issues as well.
Women do it all the time. We manage to take care of our jobs, our families, our homes and our money all at the same time. Come on, how many of us have gone to the store and upon returning home have managed to not only have baby in one arm, but loads of groceries in the other? It's called balancing. And, in this administration, that feat of magic is long overdue.
The fighting and arguing is all well and good, but seriously debating the issues needs to take place sometime soon. There's no reason why Bush can't debate with Kerry now. The Democratic Party has all but given the nomination to Kerry already. I receive regular mailings from the party and it's Kerry, Kerry, Kerry. Why wait until the last months of the campaigns to debate? Why not allow us ample time to decide who we are going to vote for? It only causes me to think that Bush is hoping the longer he waits the more dis-interested the people will be in debates. Maybe if he waits long enough, what he does or does not say won't matter because by then he will have twarted another attack or he will have pulled our troops from Iraq or he'll perform another feat of unbelieveable magic.
I've long held the position that the party system is outdated. I've also held the position that anyone (within the age and citizenship guidelines) that wants to run for president should be allowed to. Why do we have a choice of essentially two? Why can't their be more than one republican or democrat to choose from? Having limited choices was well and good when this country was young, when there weren't near the number of people and opinions that their are now. Hopefully, this will change in my granddaughter's lifetime. I'm not holding my breath.
posted on April 22, 2004 06:51:54 AM new
The public, not just us, is asking for his whole Military Record not just the parts he wants us to see. I know that part of it was posted yesterday now to clarify, we should be given his whole Military record.
When he does that then I think we can debate sensibelly not what we think.
posted on April 22, 2004 07:04:05 AM new
Cheryl - The reason I know this President has said he's willing to debate Kerry is because in that same article I read it said he's welcomed all third parties to join the debate.....rather than discounting all BUT the two parties in the National debates as is the norm.
When the debates are held, I'd guess would be sometime after July when the parties have established who will represent them, formally,.....as it's usually done. Wouldn't expect there to be exceptions made this year long held tradition/rule....there's no reason for that.
But the my point was he HAS said he'll debate kerry which some appear not to have heard. Just as some think kerry was only asked to open his military records a couple of days before he did....which also is not true. This was asked [at least] back in March if not before that.
He knows all too well what happens at election time. Promises get forgotten, issues get put on the back burner and special interest groups start to nudge their way in. Dennis is sticking around to make sure that doesn't happen.
Your candidate may believe he's going to make sure that doesn't happen, but reports are starting already that kerry's campaign is looking to which issues they can go more to the 'center' on, in hopes that his ultra-left liberal positions/votes won't be noticed. Guess he's not like your candidate in 'holding firm' to his convictions.
posted on April 22, 2004 07:19:06 AM new
Where has he said that Linda? The only reply I've seen fromthe Bush campaign is a flip little "he should debate himself first" --nowhere can I find mention that Bush said he wants to debate Kerry + third parties.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on April 22, 2004 07:57:42 AM new
Why are people so caught up in his "war" record?
Look at his Senatorial record is reason enough not to support him.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
It's too bad that their blindness can't see they are killing more soldiers than President Bush ever has... Protest Loud and Proud! Your fellow taliban and insurgents are rejoicing at the support...
posted on April 22, 2004 10:21:30 AM new
LLibra - you are a little behind the time on that article - it was not written on the 21st, it was written early on the 20th before the records were launched on his website.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 22, 2004 07:01:09 PM new
Libra - cponsidering that you didn't seem to know when he promsed to release is records (unless you usually define two days as "a while ago" and you had no idea that the records were posted online despite the link being her in the forum and that you posted an out of date article on "missing records" I was wondering if you ccould could give us a ew more details on what you feel to be missing or are you just parroting what stil another uninformed talk radio calller is complaining about? Do ou actual knwo what it is you are asking for to know whether or not it has been released? Have you actually read the records that have been released?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 22, 2004 07:17:17 PM new
about debating Kerry,
fenix says that until AFTER the Dem Convention, and its TOTALLY official that Kerry is the candidate, do the candidates debate, SO whats the deal about Bush not debating Kerry, obviously? he isn't going to until after the convention.
Couple questions, couldn't someone like say, Hillary get the nomination at the convention, I have heard that a few places
and second; when is the Democratic Convention?
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
They know that Bush wouldn't stand a chance--in fact he'd be jhust plain embarrassing.
Then there's still 6+ months to go. Haven't seen kerry take many positions himself yet....just a lot of whining about what he thinks this President is doing wrong so far.