If You're Voting for Kerry/Edwards...

[The Successful Dropout]

The reason that I'm voting for Kerry/Edwards this year isn't really because I like them, or because I'm a Democrat (I don't label myself either/or). It's simply because I dislike the way Bush runs this country. While I doubt Kerry being a very good president, I'd much rather him be in there then Bush. I'd vote for someone besides these two, but then my vote wouldn't really count. I'm just curious if anyone else is in the same situation...where you don't really care for Kerry, but you have to vote for him because you hate Bush. I think that it would be pretty shocking to find out just how many people are only voting for Kerry because of this...and not because he's well-suited to be the president.

[Squirms]

I think that is the way every person who is voting for Kerry is thinking. Kerry will help bring this country closer to socialism. Yippee.

[The Successful Dropout]

i think its the only reason anyone is voting for him too...thats the whole reason for this post...its kinda sad when anyone can run for president and have a good chance of being elected just because a lot of ppl hate the current president

note: im not a political freak....i won't get into political debates....if you yell at me for this post or question me about anything to do with politics, i'll probably just do something mature and say, "eat one".......so please don't bother....

[legion_stxds]

The reason that I'm voting for Kerry/Edwards this year isn't really because I like them, or because I'm a Democrat (I don't label myself either/or). It's simply because I dislike the way Bush runs this country. While I doubt Kerry being a very good president, I'd much rather him be in there then Bush. I'd vote for someone besides these two, but then my vote wouldn't really count. I'm just curious if anyone else is in the same situation...where you don't really care for Kerry, but you have to vote for him because you hate Bush. I think that it would be pretty shocking to find out just how many people are only voting for Kerry because of this...and not because he's well-suited to be the president.

I'm sorry... but personally that is a horrible logic. Voting just to remove someone from office and blindly choosing a candidate based solely on the idea that your vote will be diluted of its potential, is truly the antithesis of what the act of voting is really all about. I hope and pray that people would not take such a course; rather, that they choose based on what caliber the people are. I don’t want to swing your vote to Bush, actually Kerry could turn out to be a great president. What I am saying is vote because you feel this person will get the job done, create new economic growth, help those who can not help themselves, and make our nation stronger.

:lol: ***Legion for president*** :lol:

[legion_stxds]

i think its the only reason anyone is voting for him too...thats the whole reason for this post...its kinda sad when anyone can run for president and have a good chance of being elected just because a lot of ppl hate the current president

note: im not a political freak....i won't get into political debates....if you yell at me for this post or question me about anything to do with politics, i'll probably just do something mature and say, "eat one".......so please don't bother....

LOL I already know.... :oops:

[Pezdro]

Truthfully, I'm not bother by Bush. He's a little narrow-sighted. I'm bother by Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Tom Ridge, John Ascroft, Mike Powell, and Donald Rumsfield. Karl Rove has enough shit on John McCain to force him from being the Republican Nominee back in 2000. He spooked out John " I can't raise my arms all the way since I was captured fighting for my country while the current president on this list where possibly serving easy guard duty and then brutually fucking tortued for several years" McCain.Cheney use to work under Gerald Ford and Regan, he's also link to Haliburton and tens of thousands of their shares. Tom Ridge only likes to tell us that terrorist can possibly strike at any time. I been living in New York post 9/11, we know that for awhile. We like something a little bit more usuable. John Ashcroft, can't dance, lost to a dead guy and never reveals information when white terrorists plan to destroy america. Colin Powell's son is now chairman of the FCC. The most conservative member of the last five years is in charge of deciding what is allowable on our t.v.s. Fun. Donald Rumsfield may have allowed the concept of torturing enemy combatants to be considered proper American behaviour. We won't know for awhile.

I could care less who is president, presidential power is by all reasons is supposed to be limiting. In fact, it can be considered a figurehead position. Only recently has the president started moving more power underneath him ( enemy combatant status). It his cabinet and the people he chooses to work underneath him, reflect the quality and the progression of his administration. A good Cabinet is what I truly look for. G-Dub has a seriously wack posse behind him. Kerry can easily improve on any one of the people I mentioned in the eyes of America. Damn, all he needs to do is bring back American Ass Kicker #1 Janet Reno back and he owns my vote. Now that was A General Attorney who would fuck with anybody, president included.

[The Successful Dropout]

hey legion...eat one....lol....look at the poll results so far and see for yourself that all of your hoping & praying isn't doing a damn thing....by the way, did i say "eat one" yet? :lol:

note: im not a religious freak....i won't often get into discussions on religion...i actually think that the bible is a load of crap....and if you yell at me for this post or question me about anything to do with religion, i'll probably just do something mature and say, "eat one".......so please don't bother....

[Pezdro]

I think that is the way every person who is voting for Kerry is thinking. Kerry will help bring this country closer to socialism. Yippee.

Meh, Americans' aren't ready for such a thing. You'll have to go to Canada to see that crazy shit in action.

[legion_stxds]

hey legion...eat one....lol....look at the poll results so far and see for yourself that all of your hoping & praying isn't doing a damn thing....by the way, did i say "eat one" yet? :lol:

LOL :D
Just throwing my two cents in... 2¢

Still gonna hope and pray too... 8)

[fireball343]

if you don't like how Bush runs this country and aren't a democrat, i really want to know what your thinking.

Bush has started something and needs to finish it, everyother wartime president stayed in office till the war was over and done with.

to vote for someone simply because you don't want someone else in office is stupid and makes me want to "try" to qoute 'Just In' (pretty sure that's the name, on Spike TV)

"What do you read" "The New York Times"
"Great, i read 3 newspapers, watch 5 hours of cnn a week, read politics agendas and what they want to do, The think that makes this country so great and so awful is that your uneducated vote has as much vaule as my vote that has dozens of hours put into it" (not exact, but close)

Point, your giving loser A the vote because President B isn't In your opinion, not good enough.

How about you vote for canidate C, Raplh Nader.

He sounds alot better than Kerry could ever lie about being.

(note* only those planning on voting for Kerry need apply to vote for Nader, if your voting Bush please continue.)

[PittsburghAfterDark]

You mean.... Kerry/Edwards would be a good Presidential team is..... losing?

I'm shocked, absolutely shocked that ABB is in the lead on this board.

[jmcc]

Yes, let's vote for Nader and split the anti-Bush vote again, allowing him to sneak into office for another term. That's a great idea.

[The Successful Dropout]

fireball...eat one....i read the headlines of the baltimore sun, the new york daily news, the new york post, the new york times, the washington times, the wallstreet journal, the racing form, and the washington post every day....if interesting enough, ill open the paper up....i deliver newspapers for a living and get sick of reading the garbage....but while im delivering papers, i have talk radio on...while im home, i have news headlines shoved in my face on tv and on the internet....and while im out and about, i have family, friends, and strangers discussing the daily news to me whether i like it or not....to say that someone is uneducated nowadays means that they close their eyes and ears 24 hrs a day....to say that my vote is uneducated says that you should eat one...so go ahead and do it...eat one

[fireball343]

hey legion...eat one....lol....look at the poll results so far and see for yourself that all of your hoping & praying isn't doing a damn thing....by the way, did i say "eat one" yet? :lol:

LOL :D
Just throwing my two cents in... 2¢

Still gonna hope and pray too... 8)

legion rules!
yeah so some video game website is turning the results that 15 people are voting Kerry, better go sell this story to the newspapers.

"ELECTION RESULTS ALREADY KNOW, THANKS TO 21 PEOPLE ON CAG.COM VOTING IN A POLL IN THEIR POLITICAL FOURMS.

Today 15 people voted Kerry while only 6 voted for not for Kerry. This election is already over.

Yeah right...

Wake up people.

Just wait for the results. I'm praying too. and i know my family is too.

[Supernothing]

lol.... I like the "eat one" binge. It's been a while since I've heard that and "bite me".

[fireball343]

I'm not picking on anyone particular in this fourm but my point is other people don't read as much. I live where the newspaper i ever have easy access to is the Dallas Morning News.
I do read The Week, Newsweek, Time, Stuff off msn and other legit sites, like New York times.

Here's another thing, you can't only read Liberal stuff and ignore Republican sources. i've read stuff of Kerry's page and the anti bush sites. you have to get both sides.

[Dok Diamond]

I cant vote yet this sucks

[The Successful Dropout]

hey legion...eat one....lol....look at the poll results so far and see for yourself that all of your hoping & praying isn't doing a damn thing....by the way, did i say "eat one" yet? :lol:

LOL :D
Just throwing my two cents in... 2¢

Still gonna hope and pray too... 8)

legion rules!
yeah so some video game website is turning the results that 15 people are voting Kerry, better go sell this story to the newspapers.

"ELECTION RESULTS ALREADY KNOW, THANKS TO 21 PEOPLE ON CAG.COM VOTING IN A POLL IN THEIR POLITICAL FOURMS.

Today 15 people voted Kerry while only 6 voted for not for Kerry. This election is already over.

Yeah right...

Wake up people.

Just wait for the results. I'm praying too. and i know my family is too.

you're poking fun at this discussion on "some video game website"...yet you're the one getting all worked up about this....on "some video game website"

-eat one

[fireball343]

And we all thought the CC sale brought out the worst in people............

Here's a thought, This fourm could ruin this site.
We have such a split of Democrat/Republican and Bush haters/lovers that we get into these arguments.

As long as these wars stay here and we don't hate eachother beacause of political views.

[jmcc]

I'm not picking on anyone particular in this fourm but my point is other people don't read as much. I live where the newspaper i ever have easy access to is the Dallas Morning News.
I do read The Week, Newsweek, Time, Stuff off msn and other legit sites, like New York times.

Here's another thing, you can't only read Liberal stuff and ignore Republican sources. i've read stuff of Kerry's page and the anti bush sites. you have to get both sides.

Yeah, and why not start at the top for your republican news? http://www.whitehouse.org/

[The Successful Dropout]

I'm not picking on anyone particular in this fourm but my point is other people don't read as much. I live where the newspaper i ever have easy access to is the Dallas Morning News.
I do read The Week, Newsweek, Time, Stuff off msn and other legit sites, like New York times.

Here's another thing, you can't only read Liberal stuff and ignore Republican sources. i've read stuff of Kerry's page and the anti bush sites. you have to get both sides.

its okay, i can't be picked on anyways....this is all in good fun to me....if anyone is catching feelings from ppl that they don't personally know on the internet, then they need to seek some help....seriously

[jmcc]

And we all thought the CC sale brought out the worst in people............

Here's a thought, This fourm could ruin this site.
We have such a split of Democrat/Republican and Bush haters/lovers that we get into these arguments.

As long as these wars stay here and we don't hate eachother beacause of political views.

Hey...because of their political...of course! I can hate people because of that!

[fireball343]

Yeah i make the mistake of reading the recent posts on the frontpage, i try to stay out of here for the most part.

Yeah so this is some video game website, big deal, cheapy didn't let that stop him from putting that on here.

[icruise]

This poll sucks. I'm not sure that Kerry/Edwards will be the "best presidential team we've ever had" but I do think they will be good AND and can't wait to get Bush out of office.

[jmcc]

Yeah i make the mistake of reading the recent posts on the frontpage, i try to stay out of here for the most part.

4 posts in 20 minutes isn't trying very hard.

[The Successful Dropout]

This poll sucks. I'm not sure that Kerry/Edwards will be the "best presidential team we've ever had" but I do think they will be good AND and can't wait to get Bush out of office.

maybe you're the one who sucks...or eats....so go eat one

isn't one of the options:
you're an idiot.....but i still love you.........you idiot?

i could've swore that was one of the options....you can choose that and call me an idiot because i didnt give you more options.....oh wait, but you don't really love me.....just choose one and shut up or don't choose one and still shut up....

[Squirms]

This poll sucks. I'm not sure that Kerry/Edwards will be the "best presidential team we've ever had" but I do think they will be good AND and can't wait to get Bush out of office.

Well if the current poll hold true Kerry doesn't have a chance. He should be up by at least ten points at this time, instead he is dead even. Michael Dukakis was up by as much as 17 points by this time in 88 against Bush 41, and we all know how that turned out.

[fireball343]

And we all thought the CC sale brought out the worst in people............

Here's a thought, This fourm could ruin this site.
We have such a split of Democrat/Republican and Bush haters/lovers that we get into these arguments.

As long as these wars stay here and we don't hate eachother beacause of political views.

Hey...because of their political...of course! I can hate people because of that!

okay fine by me, i do it too yeah,

i've got to head out, go make sure i'm not missing any Cheap ass deals, while i'm talking cheap ass politics, then i've got to go out for half the day.

i've got this election and the next before i get a vote.
i'm backing bush, not because of any war crap, but because he backs my religous beliefs, that's more important to me than anything.
i'm against gay marriage, against abortion (except if rape), and i'm against the "biggest bunch of crooked liars" running this country.

Why don't we start hearing some political statements by Kerry about what he's going to do, i already learned what bush is going to do watching kerry ads, what's kerry going to do?

i'll be back on CAG at 1 maybe in these fourms but i doubt it.

[Pezdro]

I'm not picking on anyone particular in this fourm but my point is other people don't read as much. I live where the newspaper i ever have easy access to is the Dallas Morning News.
I do read The Week, Newsweek, Time, Stuff off msn and other legit sites, like New York times.

Here's another thing, you can't only read Liberal stuff and ignore Republican sources. i've read stuff of Kerry's page and the anti bush sites. you have to get both sides.

I get an email from President Bush's Re-Election campaign about once a week ( I never signed up for it, so its technically spam, but I like to see what the other half reads). I watch Fox News, which is currently being sued for being so unbalanced.

Everyone feels that the reason other people don't agree with their opinion is because they are legitmately uninformed and ignorant about the issues.

That's not true. I don't agree with you because of my experiences over the last 4 years of my life underneath the current administration. I feel that my life as a whole has declined in value even though I have done alot personally to advance it. I took stock of what things had change, and I saw alot of things were changed by the current administation that I don't agree with. As an american, and as the child of political refugees who fled their home country to a place where their children could be allowed to vote and voice their opinions about the place they live, I fear that we are starting to lose the rights that many, many men and women have died and bled for. I don't have trust in my president's cabinets, sub-ordiantes, and co-workers. They've lost it. I'm going to make what I believe is well-informed choice and select a candiate that I've supported for pretty much the beginning of the run. I may not agree with everything he says, but politics and this country are about compromise. The current president doesn't seem to understand that. He's stated before that It's his vision, his decision, on how america is run. Hell, I still don't like him for what he did to McCain back in 2000. John Mac as president would have been alot better.

[Supernothing]

against abortion (except if rape),

Let me guess, you're against it because it's murder? If it's concepted during rape is the abortion no longer murder?

note: My views on abortion will not be expressed during this or any other online debate in the near future.

[jmcc]

And we all thought the CC sale brought out the worst in people............

Here's a thought, This fourm could ruin this site.
We have such a split of Democrat/Republican and Bush haters/lovers that we get into these arguments.

As long as these wars stay here and we don't hate eachother beacause of political views.

Hey...because of their political...of course! I can hate people because of that!

okay fine by me, i do it too yeah,

i've got to head out, go make sure i'm not missing any Cheap ass deals, while i'm talking cheap ass politics, then i've got to go out for half the day.

i've got this election and the next before i get a vote.
i'm backing bush, not because of any war crap, but because he backs my religous beliefs, that's more important to me than anything.
i'm against gay marriage, against abortion (except if rape), and i'm against the "biggest bunch of crooked liars" running this country.

Why don't we start hearing some political statements by Kerry about what he's going to do, i already learned what bush is going to do watching kerry ads, what's kerry going to do?

i'll be back on CAG at 1 maybe in these fourms but i doubt it.

If you're opposed to abortion for religious reasons you can't accept it in any case, whatsoever. That's goin' to hell talk what you've got up there.

[E-Z-B]

i'm backing bush, not because of any war crap, but because he backs my religous beliefs, that's more important to me than anything.
i'm against gay marriage, against abortion (except if rape), and i'm against the "biggest bunch of crooked liars" running this country.

Why don't we start hearing some political statements by Kerry about what he's going to do, i already learned what bush is going to do watching kerry ads, what's kerry going to do?

Religious beliefs? Bush??? Oh, I forgot about the secret book of the Bible where it tells us to wage war and to support the dealth penalty. And to legalize AK-47's. Yeah. That's why my religious beliefs fall in line with Bush's too.

And the last time I checked, all the political ads over the past two months have been:

Kerry's: positive, focusing on him
Bush's: negative, bashing Kerry

Kerry's are positive because the Republican attack machine has been relentless trying to destroy him. Kerry doesn't need to launch negative ads against Bush because there's already enough of that going around (i.e., Fahrenheith 9/11, hollywood, the dailey news stories, etc.)

[Pezdro]

[quote="fireball343"]i've got this election and the next before i get a vote.
quote]

I hate arguing mentally with 13 year olds, it's like beating on babies. It should be against the law.

[jmcc]

[quote=fireball343]i've got this election and the next before i get a vote.
quote]

I hate arguing mentally with 13 year olds, it's like beating on babies. It should be against the law.

How else are we going to put those babies in their place?!

[Quackzilla]

I think someone who knows what it feels like to be counted as a "casualty" will tend to be more diplomatic than a draft dodging war hawk.

[Squirms]

I've seen plenty of Kerry approved Anti-Bush ads. I've also seen tons of Anti-Bush ads run by many of these Kerry supporting groups such as Moveon. Good way to circumvent campaign finance reform by having these special groups that don't have to follow the law. If the Bushites tried something like this, the left would be screaming how it's unfair.
Regardless, even during all these attacks against the current administration from all sides, thier approval rating is actually rising according to Zogby's.

[Squirms]

I think someone who knows what it feels like to be counted as a "casualty" will tend to be more diplomatic than a draft dodging war hawk.

Bush didn't dodge the draft. If it's a choice between a man that served in the Air National Guard, or a man that served in Vietnam, called for a purple heart everytime he got a scratch, admittedly performed war crimes, and was generally disliked by most of his platoon mates, then give me the guy that flew a plane.

[The Successful Dropout]

against abortion (except if rape),

Let me guess, you're against it because it's murder? If it's concepted during rape is the abortion no longer murder?

note: My views on abortion will not be expressed during this or any other online debate in the near future.

ill express my views on abortion and take the heat....not knowing if they're the same views as yours or not...but i do have the two magic words to 'fend off anyone who tries to yell at me about my beliefs..."eat one"...works everytime

abortion...im very for abortion when it comes to almost any situation...it is the woman's choice...or the couple's choice, but if the woman wants the abortion, then the man should agree due to the fact that he should respect the very hard and very serious decision that she had to make...if a girl is raped, she should be aloud to have an abortion....if a girl isn't brought up well enough to know right from wrong and ends up pregnant, feeling that she needs to have an abortion, she should be aloud to have an abortion....if a girl can't take care of her baby due to her mental status, money status, health status, etc...she should be aloud to have an abortion....there are many reasons abortions are necessary....the only reason that i can think of that an abortion shouldn't be allowed is if it is sickingly done on purpose....if a couple doesn't care if they get pregnant because they'll just have an abortion if it happens....and if a couple tries to get pregnant just so they can have an abortion (some sickos out there would do this, im sure).....other then that, why the hell can't it be the woman's choice?

as for voting for bush because he backs your religious beliefs? thats one of the reasons that i hate the man....im not religious in the slightest bit....i have my own beliefs and i can think for myself....bush is a jesus freak (yes i listen to howard stern) and mixes religion with everything....im not against anybody for their viewpoints or opinions...but enough is enough...you can't run a country and treat ppl fairly and equally when you're narrow-minded (yeah i know, no president is gonna make sure everyone is treated 100% fairly and equally...but this is ridiculous to me)

as for gay marriages, im very much so against gay marriages and gays in general....but you're fighting a battle that you'll never win if you think gays are just gonna disappear....either just avoid 'em, join 'em, or get over it (i myself am avoiding them)

[jmcc]

I think someone who knows what it feels like to be counted as a "casualty" will tend to be more diplomatic than a draft dodging war hawk.

Bush didn't dodge the draft. If it's a choice between a man that "served" in the Air National Guard, or a man that served in Vietnam, called for a purple heart everytime he got a scratch, admittedly performed war crimes, and was generally disliked by most of his platoon mates, then give me the guy that flew a plane.

You forgot the quotes around served up there. Glad to help.

[Squirms]

I think someone who knows what it feels like to be counted as a "casualty" will tend to be more diplomatic than a draft dodging war hawk.

Bush didn't dodge the draft. If it's a choice between a man that "served" in the Air National Guard, or a man that "served" in Vietnam, called for a purple heart everytime he got a scratch, admittedly performed war crimes, and was generally disliked by most of his platoon mates, then give me the guy that flew a plane.

You forgot the quotes around served up there. Glad to help.

Just to make it fair they are now both changed.

[Supernothing]

ill express my views on abortion and take the heat....not knowing if they're the same views as yours or not...but i do have the two magic words to 'fend off anyone who tries to yell at me about my beliefs..."eat one"...works everytime


note: I deleted most of his quote to save space....

Again, I'm not gonna voice my side, but it looks as though you believe it is right. And your opinion I respect. It's the people who says it's wrong.... unless(this) or unless(that) whose opinion I do not respect. It's either right or wrong, it can't be both.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

Did someone say... abortion?

I don't think I have yet seen an exhibited rationale as to why abortion on demand is just a plain ugly fact of life. Now I am against abortion as birth control, I am for keeping it safe and legal. However this is the "ugliest" woman I think I have ever come across and it's completely because of her own words and actions. She would rather keep her "lifestyle" than deal with the consequences of her actions. The following is cut and pasted from the New York Times, I have provided a link but for ease of reading I just decided to post it. You need to be a non-paying subscriber but it's a pain in the ass to set up a NYT account.

I grew up in a working-class family in Pennsylvania not knowing my father. I have never missed not having him. I firmly believe that, but for much of my life I felt that what I probably would have gained was economic security and with that societal security. Growing up with a single mother, I was always buying into the myth that I was going to be seduced in the back of a pickup truck and become pregnant when I was 16. I had friends when I was in school who were helping to rear nieces and nephews, because their siblings, who were not much older, were having babies. I had friends from all over the class spectrum: I saw the nieces and nephews on the one hand and country-club memberships and station wagons on the other. I felt I was in the middle. I had this fear: What would it take for me to just slip?

Now I'm 34. My boyfriend, Peter, and I have been together three years. I'm old enough to presume that I wasn't going to have an easy time becoming pregnant. I was tired of being on the pill, because it made me moody. Before I went off it, Peter and I talked about what would happen if I became pregnant, and we both agreed that we would have the child.

I found out I was having triplets when I went to my obstetrician. The doctor had just finished telling me I was going to have a low-risk pregnancy. She turned on the sonogram machine. There was a long pause, then she said, ''Are you sure you didn't take fertility drugs?'' I said, ''I'm positive.'' Peter and I were very shocked when she said there were three. ''You know, this changes everything,'' she said. ''You'll have to see a specialist.''

My immediate response was, I cannot have triplets. I was not married; I lived in a five-story walk-up in the East Village; I worked freelance; and I would have to go on bed rest in March. I lecture at colleges, and my biggest months are March and April. I would have to give up my main income for the rest of the year. There was a part of me that was sure I could work around that. But it was a matter of, Do I want to?

I looked at Peter and asked the doctor: ''Is it possible to get rid of one of them? Or two of them?'' The obstetrician wasn't an expert in selective reduction, but she knew that with a shot of potassium chloride you could eliminate one or more.

Having felt physically fine up to this point, I got on the subway afterward, and all of a sudden, I felt ill. I didn't want to eat anything. What I was going through seemed like a very unnatural experience. On the subway, Peter asked, ''Shouldn't we consider having triplets?'' And I had this adverse reaction: ''This is why they say it's the woman's choice, because you think I could just carry triplets. That's easy for you to say, but I'd have to give up my life.'' Not only would I have to be on bed rest at 20 weeks, I wouldn't be able to fly after 15. I was already at eight weeks. When I found out about the triplets, I felt like: It's not the back of a pickup at 16, but now I'm going to have to move to Staten Island. I'll never leave my house because I'll have to care for these children. I'll have to start shopping only at Costco and buying big jars of mayonnaise. Even in my moments of thinking about having three, I don't think that deep down I was ever considering it.

The specialist called me back at 10 p.m. I had just finished watching a Boston Pops concert at Symphony Hall. As everybody burst into applause, I watched my cellphone vibrating, grabbed it and ran into the lobby. He told me that he does a detailed sonogram before doing a selective reduction to see if one fetus appears to be struggling. The procedure involves a shot of potassium chloride to the heart of the fetus. There are a lot more complications when a woman carries multiples. And so, from the doctor's perspective, it's a matter of trying to save the woman this trauma. After I talked to the specialist, I told Peter, ''That's what I'm going to do.'' He replied, ''What we're going to do.'' He respected what I was going through, but at a certain point, he felt that this was a decision we were making. I agreed.

When we saw the specialist, we found out that I was carrying identical twins and a stand alone. My doctors thought the stand alone was three days older. There was something psychologically comforting about that, since I wanted to have just one. Before the procedure, I was focused on relaxing. But Peter was staring at the sonogram screen thinking: Oh, my gosh, there are three heartbeats. I can't believe we're about to make two disappear. The doctor came in, and then Peter was asked to leave. I said, ''Can Peter stay?'' The doctor said no. I know Peter was offended by that.

Two days after the procedure, smells no longer set me off and I no longer wanted to eat nothing but sour-apple gum. I went on to have a pretty seamless pregnancy. But I had a recurring feeling that this was going to come back and haunt me. Was I going to have a stillbirth or miscarry late in my pregnancy?

I had a boy, and everything is fine. But thinking about becoming pregnant again is terrifying. Am I going to have quintuplets? I would do the same thing if I had triplets again, but if I had twins, I would probably have twins. Then again, I don't know.

This is the absolute height of selfishness and an example of the completely "me" focused American society. There are hundreds of thousands of couples that would have adopted her twins. Meanwhile this ugly woman gets to sit down and tell her son that "I killed your twin brothers or sisters. I wanted to save you from a life growing up on Staten Island and shopping at Costco. Now enjoy your latte and tell your psychiatrist you now have enough survival and edipal issues to deal with for a lifetime."

This is the sickest woman and article I think I've seen on the issue in my lifetime. Funny thing is it's supposed to be emotionally gripping. Instead I hope this woman falls in front of the A train.

New York Times "Lives" Article (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/18/magazine/18LIVES.html)

[Quackzilla]

I think someone who knows what it feels like to be counted as a "casualty" will tend to be more diplomatic than a draft dodging war hawk.

Bush didn't dodge the draft. If it's a choice between a man that served in the Air National Guard, or a man that served in Vietnam, called for a purple heart everytime he got a scratch, admittedly performed war crimes, and was generally disliked by most of his platoon mates, then give me the guy that flew a plane.


Kerry protested the war crimes he had seen, he was not involved.

He fought in the Vietnam war while nobody has records of Bush being on base and Bush missed a dental appointment on base (oral hygene is inportant).

Kerry has 3 purple hearts and he was injured three times.
The last purple heart was disputed, but it was given to him anyway, so the "scratch" argument is invalid.


grow up.

[The Successful Dropout]

ill express my views on abortion and take the heat....not knowing if they're the same views as yours or not...but i do have the two magic words to 'fend off anyone who tries to yell at me about my beliefs..."eat one"...works everytime


note: I deleted most of his quote to save space....

Again, I'm not gonna voice my side, but it looks as though you believe it is right. And your opinion I respect. It's the people who says it's wrong.... unless(this) or unless(that) whose opinion I do not respect. It's either right or wrong, it can't be both.

well i believe that it is right....and you respected my opinion...but i did throw in an "unless"....and you said that you don't respect people's opinions when they throw in the "unless"....but my "unless" was for the extreme folks out there....nowadays, you have to throw in an "unless" no matter what, just so you're accurate...because someone will always come up with that "what if...." statement..............anyways, you either understood that thats why i was saying "unless," and thats why you respected my opinion still...or you were afraid of me saying "eat one" to you lol...

[PittsburghAfterDark]

John Kerry's Purple Hearts

Purple Heart Number One:

The Boston Globe - June 6, 2003 -- Kerry experienced his first intense combat action on Dec. 2, 1968, when he "semi-volunteered for, was semi-drafted" for a risky covert mission in which he essentially was supposed to "flush out" the enemy, using a little Boston Whaler named "Batman." A larger backup craft was called "Robin."

Unfortunately, Robin had engine trouble, and Batman's exit was delayed until the boats could depart in unison. The Batman crew encountered some Viet Cong, engaged in a firefight, and Kerry was slightly wounded on his arm, earning his first Purple Heart on his first day of serious action.

"It was not a very serious wound at all," recalled William Schachte, who oversaw the mission and went on to become a rear admiral.

Purple Heart Number Two:

The Boston Globe - June 6, 2003 -- On Feb. 20, 1969, Kerry earned his second Purple Heart after sustaining a shrapnel wound in his left thigh. According to a previously unreported Navy report on the battle, a two-boat patrol spotted three men on a riverbank who were wearing black pajamas and running and engaged them in a firefight. While not criticizing this engagement, the Navy report did challenge the decision of unnamed skippers to fire at other "targets of opportunity" in the area.

"Area seemed extremely prosperous and open to psyops action, minimum number of defensive and no offensive bunkers detected," the report said. The naval official who wrote the report concluded: "Future missions in this area should be oriented toward psyops rather than destruction."

The destruction included 40 sampans, 10 hut-style hootches, three bunkers, and 5,000 pounds of rice. The crews from two swift boats had expended more than 14,000 rounds of.50-caliber ammunition. No enemy casualties were reported.

Purple Heart Number Three

The Boston Globe June 6, 2003 --. . . On March 13, 1969, a mine detonated near Kerry's boat, wounding Kerry in the right arm, according to the citation written by [Navy Admiral Elmo "Bud"] Zumwalt. Guerrillas started firing on the boats from the shoreline. Kerry then realized that he had lost overboard a Green Beret who is identified only as "Rassman."
"The man was receiving sniper fire from both banks," according to Kerry's Bronze Star citation from that day. "Lt. Kerry directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire, while from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain, with disregard for his personal safety, he pulled the man aboard. Lt. Kerry then directed his boat to return and assist the other damaged craft and towed the boat to safety. Lt. Kerry's calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the US Naval Service," Zumwalt's citation said.

Home Free:

The Boston Globe June 6, 2003 -- Kerry had been wounded three times and received three Purple Hearts. Asked about the severity of the wounds, Kerry said that one of them cost him about two days of service, and that the other two did not interrupt his duty. "Walking wounded," as Kerry put it. A shrapnel wound in his left arm gave Kerry pain for years. Kerry declined a request from the Globe to sign a waiver authorizing the release of military documents that are covered under the Privacy Act and that might shed more light on the extent of the treatment Kerry needed as a result of the wounds.

"There were an awful lot of Purple Hearts -- from shrapnel, some of those might have been M-40 grenades," said [George] Elliott, Kerry's commanding officer. "The Purple Hearts were coming down in boxes. Kerry, he had three Purple Hearts. None of them took him off duty. Not to belittle it, that was more the rule than the exception."

The Boston Globe - June 6, 2003 -- . . . The National Archives provided the Globe with a Navy "instruction" document that formed the basis for Kerry's request. The instruction, titled 1300.39, says that a Naval officer who requires hospitalization on two separate occasions, or who receives three wounds "regardless of the nature of the wounds," can ask a superior officer to request a reassignment. The instruction makes clear the reassignment is not automatic. It says that the reassignment "will be determined after consideration of his physical classification for duty and on an individual basis."
Because Kerry's wounds were not considered serious, his reassignment appears to have been made on an individual basis.

Moreover, the instruction makes clear that Kerry could have asked that any reassignment be waived.

The bottom line is that Kerry could have remained but he chose to seek an early transfer . . .

[The Successful Dropout]

also....stem-cell research....bush is an ass on that topic as well....a complete ass imo

[Supernothing]

ill express my views on abortion and take the heat....not knowing if they're the same views as yours or not...but i do have the two magic words to 'fend off anyone who tries to yell at me about my beliefs..."eat one"...works everytime


note: I deleted most of his quote to save space....

Again, I'm not gonna voice my side, but it looks as though you believe it is right. And your opinion I respect. It's the people who says it's wrong.... unless(this) or unless(that) whose opinion I do not respect. It's either right or wrong, it can't be both.

well i believe that it is right....and you respected my opinion...but i did throw in an "unless"....and you said that you don't respect people's opinions when they throw in the "unless"....but my "unless" was for the extreme folks out there....nowadays, you have to throw in an "unless" no matter what, just so you're accurate...because someone will always come up with that "what if...." statement..............anyways, you either understood that thats why i was saying "unless," and thats why you respected my opinion still...or you were afraid of me saying "eat one" to you lol...


excpetions to every rule......

[The Successful Dropout]

I think someone who knows what it feels like to be counted as a "casualty" will tend to be more diplomatic than a draft dodging war hawk.

Bush didn't dodge the draft. If it's a choice between a man that served in the Air National Guard, or a man that served in Vietnam, called for a purple heart everytime he got a scratch, admittedly performed war crimes, and was generally disliked by most of his platoon mates, then give me the guy that flew a plane.


Kerry protested the war crimes he had seen, he was not involved.

He fought in the Vietnam war while nobody has records of Bush being on base and Bush missed a dental appointment on base (oral hygene is inportant).

Kerry has 3 purple hearts and he was injured three times.
The last purple heart was disputed, but it was given to him anyway, so the "scratch" argument is invalid.


grow up.

the scratch arguement is bullshit anyways....ppl say that kerry only had scratches? bush didn't even want to get a scratch

[friedram]

Well I'm "praying" too. And our "prayers" will be answered because I know that I belive in the right "god".

Get a grip- any higher power diety would not endorse either side. The entire argument "God is on my side" is, and always will be- a supersized self serving load of horse dung.

[E-Z-B]

Bush's dad got him into the National Guard, flying a plane that was obsolete and would never be flown in vietnam. And he didn't even stick around to do that during his entire service. So he might as well have just "dodged the draft".

Kerry was in harm's way in vietnam, serving our country. After being wounded three times, can you expect more from him? What does it take? The loss of a limb? He received his purple hearts while he was a soldier, before becoming a politician. It was up to the government to decide whether or not he earned those purple hearts, and they chose to award him. Kerry didn't award those to himself.

[Quackzilla]

against abortion (except if rape),

Let me guess, you're against it because it's murder? If it's concepted during rape is the abortion no longer murder?

note: My views on abortion will not be expressed during this or any other online debate in the near future.

Why are ou trying to mix religion and logic, they are mortal enemies!

[PittsburghAfterDark]

EZB their were two missions the USAF was charged with in the late 1960's. Combat missions in Vietnam and protecting the U.S. mainlaind from the perceived threat of Soviet bombers. You do realize that when we go to war not every single plane, soldier, tank, ariman, sailor and ship is sent to fight.... right?

You look at the article I just posted about Kerry's purple hearts and determine for yourself the veracity of their worth.

[Squirms]

EZB their were two missions the USAF was charged with in the late 1960's. Combat missions in Vietnam and protecting the U.S. mainlaind from the perceived threat of Soviet bombers. You do realize that when we go to war not every single plane, soldier, tank, ariman, sailor and ship is sent to fight.... right?

You look at the article I just posted about Kerry's purple hearts and determine for yourself the veracity of their worth.

I was just about to post that article myself. Also it must be noted that his second purple heart does have some controversy behind it. Kerry fired a mortar onto the shore thinking that there were Viet Cong there. No one else saw them, and reports state that the injury he received was shrapnel from the mortar he fired.

Also in regards to committing war atrocities.
Mr. Kerry, you said at one time or another that you think our policies in Vietnam are tantamount to genocide and that the responsibility lies at all chains of command over there. Do you consider that you personally as a Naval officer committed atrocities in Vietnam or crimes punishable by law in this country?

-- Crosby Noyes, Washington Evening Star

There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down.

[E-Z-B]

I've seen plenty of Kerry approved Anti-Bush ads. I've also seen tons of Anti-Bush ads run by many of these Kerry supporting groups such as Moveon. Good way to circumvent campaign finance reform by having these special groups that don't have to follow the law. If the Bushites tried something like this, the left would be screaming how it's unfair.
Regardless, even during all these attacks against the current administration from all sides, thier approval rating is actually rising according to Zogby's.

I haven't seen many outside groups run anti-bush ads - yet. I figured they'd wait until September during the new fall line-up.

And here's bush's approval rating record:

disapproval is around 50%:

http://www.pollkatz.homestead.com/files/pollkatzmainGRAPHICS_9432_image001.gif

With approval in the mid 40's:

http://www.pollkatz.homestead.com/files/pollkatzmainGRAPHICS_8911_image001.gif

[Kevtones]

I think Bush should make a documentary on just how similar MIchael Moore is to him, only Moore much fatter, more influential but just as egotistical and deceitful. Anyhow, I have no idea who I'll be voting for. I'm giving it four months.

[legion_stxds]

Religious beliefs? Bush??? Oh, I forgot about the secret book of the Bible where it tells us to wage war and to support the dealth penalty. And to legalize AK-47's. Yeah. That's why my religious beliefs fall in line with Bush's too.

War and Death eh??? :twisted:

Genesis 6:7
"And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. "

Exodus 12:29
"And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle."

Leviticus 20:13
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

[Supernothing]

You forgot...

Austin 3:16
"I just whooped your ass!"

[E-Z-B]

EZB their were two missions the USAF was charged with in the late 1960's. Combat missions in Vietnam and protecting the U.S. mainlaind from the perceived threat of Soviet bombers. You do realize that when we go to war not every single plane, soldier, tank, ariman, sailor and ship is sent to fight.... right?

You look at the article I just posted about Kerry's purple hearts and determine for yourself the veracity of their worth.

It doesn't matter about the purple hearts. The military AND our own U.S. Government decided to award them to him. John Kerry didn't decide to award John Kerry Purple Hearts. If you want to question why they were awarded to him, then contact the military. Get it? No, I didn't think so.

And if there was a draft going around, I hope that my daddy has connections to get me into the national guard too. I'd rather stay here than go to some country like Vietnam, North Korea, or Iraq. Good thing our president had those connections to save his sorry ass.

[legion_stxds]

You forgot...

Austin 3:16
"I just whooped your ass!"

LOL :lol:

[E-Z-B]

Religious beliefs? Bush??? Oh, I forgot about the secret book of the Bible where it tells us to wage war and to support the dealth penalty. And to legalize AK-47's. Yeah. That's why my religious beliefs fall in line with Bush's too.

War and Death eh??? :twisted:

Genesis 6:7
"And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. "

Exodus 12:29
"And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle."

Leviticus 20:13
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

That's the OLD covenant. Assuming you're a christian man like our Great Leader, then you would be following the NEW covenant. The jews couldn't follow the old one, so it became obsolete, and a new one was put in place.

Besides, the bible also says "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

So you're saying that you're alright with slavery too since it's in the old testament?

[legion_stxds]

Religious beliefs? Bush??? Oh, I forgot about the secret book of the Bible where it tells us to wage war and to support the dealth penalty. And to legalize AK-47's. Yeah. That's why my religious beliefs fall in line with Bush's too.

War and Death eh??? :twisted:

Genesis 6:7
"And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. "

Exodus 12:29
"And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle."

Leviticus 20:13
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

That's the OLD covenant. Assuming you're a christian man like our Great Leader, then you would be following the NEW covenant. The jews couldn't follow the old one, so it became obsolete, and a new one was put in place.

Besides, the bible also says "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

So you're saying that you're alright with slavery too since it's in the old testament?

Nope, though I am answering your original post as to were the bible notes violence and destruction.

Edit: Plus... the new testament is not to be taken without considerations from the old. We are not to add nor take away from the bible.

[E-Z-B]

Religious beliefs? Bush??? Oh, I forgot about the secret book of the Bible where it tells us to wage war and to support the dealth penalty. And to legalize AK-47's. Yeah. That's why my religious beliefs fall in line with Bush's too.

War and Death eh??? :twisted:

Genesis 6:7
"And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. "

Exodus 12:29
"And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle."

Leviticus 20:13
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

That's the OLD covenant. Assuming you're a christian man like our Great Leader, then you would be following the NEW covenant. The jews couldn't follow the old one, so it became obsolete, and a new one was put in place.

Besides, the bible also says "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

So you're saying that you're alright with slavery too since it's in the old testament?

Nope, though I am answering your original post as to were the bible notes violence and destruction.

Edit: Plus... the new testament is not to be taken without considerations from the old. We are not to add nor take away from the bible.

Keep in mind that the old testament teaches about destroying your enemies, while the new testament teaches to love your enemies. Apparently, bush isn't following the christian teachings in the bible, but that nonetheless doesn't stop him from convincing you that he's a christian man. Unless the new testament teaches somewhere about the righteousness of war and the death penalty that I must've missed. Maybe it's in the Gospel according to Dubya chapter.

[Pezdro]

Dude, don't forget the shrimp. I can't stand the fact that no one ever boycots Red Lobster or Long John Silver. Those two places are dens of Immorality.

[legion_stxds]

Dude, don't forget the shrimp. I can't stand the fact that no one ever boycots Red Lobster or Long John Silver. Those two places are dens of Immorality.

LOL :P

[dennis_t]

EZB their were two missions the USAF was charged with in the late 1960's. Combat missions in Vietnam and protecting the U.S. mainlaind from the perceived threat of Soviet bombers. You do realize that when we go to war not every single plane, soldier, tank, ariman, sailor and ship is sent to fight.... right?

You look at the article I just posted about Kerry's purple hearts and determine for yourself the veracity of their worth.

I was just about to post that article myself. Also it must be noted that his second purple heart does have some controversy behind it. Kerry fired a mortar onto the shore thinking that there were Viet Cong there. No one else saw them, and reports state that the injury he received was shrapnel from the mortar he fired.

Also in regards to committing war atrocities.
Mr. Kerry, you said at one time or another that you think our policies in Vietnam are tantamount to genocide and that the responsibility lies at all chains of command over there. Do you consider that you personally as a Naval officer committed atrocities in Vietnam or crimes punishable by law in this country?

-- Crosby Noyes, Washington Evening Star

There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down.

It really disturbs and offends me that Republicans are so willing to trash the war record of a distinguished veteran who saved lives, got shot at, got into the thick of things in Vietnam. He didn't get a deferral, didn't run to daddy to get him into the National Guard. He was there and he was on the line and he served bravely. You don't get a Silver Star and a Bronze Star for covering your ass at the expense of all around you. You get those medals for exhibiting bravery and leadership.

I'm particularly disappointed you follow this argument, PAD. You know what it takes to serve, and you know the difference between being in a situation where you are exposed to hostile gunfire versus a situation where you fly around Texas just in case the Soviets attack. And you know that people don't win medals like those unless they have what it takes. You are properly proud of your military service, but you run it through the mud when you don't acknowledge the bravery of other veterans.

As far as Kerry leaving early -- at least he went, and served bravely while there. You mean to tell me you wouldn't try to get out ASAP after being in as many firefights as he was in? And just to compare records, Bush couldn't serve out his full service, and he wasn't in a single firefight.

If you don't like Kerry, fine. But christ, veterans have given us so much, why trash their service with crap like this? It turns my stomach.

[MrBadExample]

Kerry was in harm's way in vietnam, serving our country. After being wounded three times, can you expect more from him? What does it take? The loss of a limb?

The loss of three limbs didn't stop the Republican attack machine from going after Max Cleland in Georgia. After McCain in S.C., that was a new low for the party and they should be ashamed and disassociate from the people responsible.

[MrBadExample]

I think Bush should make a documentary on just how similar MIchael Moore is to him, only Moore much fatter, more influential but just as egotistical and deceitful. Anyhow, I have no idea who I'll be voting for. I'm giving it four months.

That's a great idea...

Bush: Michael Moore is just as bad as me. Vote for me!

[PittsburghAfterDark]

There are hundreds of thousands of veterans, if not millions, that have stood up against John Kerry. I would question anyone under my command that put himself in for thePurple Heart from an injury that didn't take them off the line. Now understand, the Purple Heart's only criteria is basically to require you recieve a wound from enemy action. Let's say one guy comes at 20 with a grenade, he's dropped by automatic fire the grenade goes off 25 yards away and a metal splinter lands in someone's arm.

The corpsman gets out tweezers, removes the splinter, puts a bandaid or bandage on the arm and medically the problem is open and shut. This soldier by letter of regulations has been wounded in combat by enemy action that required medical attention. He is eligible for the Purple Heart. I'm not going to dispute that and neither would most members of the military. However 98% of combat troops I've ever met would never put in for the award in that situation.

From the Boston newspaper article I posted I would say what they listed as Kerry's third Purple Heart summary is the only one the majority of service people wouldn't dispute as valid. To describe yourself as "walking wounded" when you have a band aid wound is disingenuous. But you have to realize soldiering is like real life, you get every kind of person under the sun, espeically in a draft environment.

I have never really questioned John Kerry's military service, yeah, he went. Yeah, he got 3 Purple Hearts that he put himself in for and then got the hell out of dodge came home. If that had been the end of it I'd say he did his time honroably and the matter was open and shut with me. However when he came home he then said he commited illegal attrocities along with every other soldier in Vietnam in extremely public forums, not privately. His words and his speeches were played for POW's in the Hanoi Hilton in an attempt to show them their country had abandoned them and even American soldiers thought they were criminals..... ahhhhh, I think that's a little different than saying mockingly that someone was keeping the skies of Texas free of Soviet bombers or didn't even show up.

EDIT:
You mean to tell me you wouldn't try to get out ASAP after being in as many firefights as he was in?

I don't know how to really convey this and have you accurately understand. However my mission, as I saw it, was to do two things. Complete assigined missions and get everyone in our outfit home safe. You don't have many officers that think in the way you're thinking. The majority of them, the good ones, don't put their safety above that of their men. I am also not saying John Kerry didn't do that when he was in combat.

However when we deployed as a unit we were all going to come home as a unit. If men were killed we all knew that was a reality of life. However I had the good fortune of never having that happen. Everyone came home. I could not imagine, in any situation, of thinking "OMG combat is horrible. I've been wounded three times, I need to get out of here and leave the fighting to the rest of the team. According to regulations, I can." I just could not imagine leaving 3 othter M1A2 commanders, 4 loaders, 4 gunners and 4 drivers because.... I could.

If you want to take something as widespread in culture about how men feel in combat watch the documentary about the real men of Easy Company that Band of Brothers was based on. They describe men who were apologizing for being wounded and not being able to fight. There were men in that outfit that went AWOL from the hospitals to rejoin their unit at the front. That's a sharp contrast from a nameless political candidate's record.

[MrBadExample]

I just find it interesting that the Republican party is the first to start whipping out yellow ribbons and waving flags when our troops go to war, yet in the last few years they have viciously attacked the service of John McCain, John Kerry and Max Cleland.

[dennis_t]

There are hundreds of thousands of veterans, if not millions, that have stood up against John Kerry. I would question anyone under my command that put himself in for thePurple Heart from an injury that didn't take them off the line. Now understand, the Purple Heart's only criteria is basically to require you recieve a wound from enemy action. Let's say one guy comes at 20 with a grenade, he's dropped by automatic fire the grenade goes off 25 yards away and a metal splinter lands in someone's arm.

The corpsman gets out tweezers, removes the splinter, puts a bandaid or bandage on the arm and medically the problem is open and shut. This soldier by letter of regulations has been wounded in combat by enemy action that required medical attention. He is eligible for the Purple Heart. I'm not going to dispute that and neither would most members of the military. However 98% of combat troops I've ever met would never put in for the award in that situation.

From the Boston newspaper article I posted I would say what they listed as Kerry's third Purple Heart summary is the only one the majority of service people wouldn't dispute as valid. To describe yourself as "walking wounded" when you have a band aid wound is disingenuous. But you have to realize soldiering is like real life, you get every kind of person under the sun, espeically in a draft environment.

I have never really questioned John Kerry's military service, yeah, he went. Yeah, he got 3 Purple Hearts that he put himself in for and then got the hell out of dodge came home. If that had been the end of it I'd say he did his time honroably and the matter was open and shut with me. However when he came home he then said he commited illegal attrocities along with every other soldier in Vietnam in extremely public forums, not privately. His words and his speeches were played for POW's in the Hanoi Hilton in an attempt to show them their country had abandoned them and even American soldiers thought they were criminals..... ahhhhh, I think that's a little different than saying mockingly that someone was keeping the skies of Texas free of Soviet bombers or didn't even show up.

First, I notice that in your discussions you never mention Kerry's Silver Star and Bronze Star, which are not normally the hallmarks of someone who "got the hell out of dodge." Very few people get these awards, and those who do get them have definitely done their country a service and don't deserve smears against their record. As a veteran, I would think that you would agree.

Second, I think a person who actually went to Vietnam, served bravely, and saw what went on over there had more of a moral right than anyone to come back and publicly object to the war. He paid his dues, he got shot at, he saved lives, he saw people die and he saw things that disturbed him. When he came home, he could either keep quiet and let the whole dirty business continue, or he could speak up and save more lives by helping to end the war as quickly as possible. I think history supports the moral decision he made.

Thus, I believe Kerry showed both physical and moral bravery in his conduct through the Vietnam War. I don't think you can argue the same point for Bush, who couldn't even be bothered to finish out his service for the Texas Air National Guard.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

Check out my lengthy edit to my previous post.

I am not singly dismissive of Kerry's service. However for much of the honorable service he had it was offset by what POW McCain was subjected to. The silver and bronze star are not given out lightly, I didn't feel the need to challenge them so take that tacit ommission that I think they were earned. The Purple Heart though can put in for by a soldier and they are almost NEVER brought up for review or questioned by any review process.

We're going to have to agree to disagree over the value of Kerry's actions once he returned to public life. I think he was as traitorous as the come. There are plenty of ways to make those opinions known in official channels and with Congressmen behind closed doors. He chose the public route that put soldiers at additional risk and gave aid and comfort to then enemy IMHO.

Now contrast this with the POW footage we got from downed pilots in Desert Storm and last year. Every single person watching them read statement knew damn well whatever they said was not being said of their own free will. The guys in the Hanoi Hilton were tortured into saying whatever it was they were forced to say. They weren't sure if the folks back home would understand what it was had been done to them to get them to betray their country. John Kerry came home and basically said the same thing the NVA wanted POW's to say but wouldn't and did it of his own free will.

As it is now troops are told if they're ever put in front of a camera say what the enemy wants you to say regardless of what it is. Everyone back home will know its a lie. Meanwhile I would love to come up with a comparison of what POW's were forced to say versus what John Kerry said willingly and have people identify each.

John Kerry earned his right to say whatever he wants, I'm not going to dispute that. However you have to ask in any situation that just because you can say something does it mean you should. That's where the main issue of contention comes.

[MrBadExample]

If you want to take something as widespread in culture about how men feel in combat watch the documentary about the real men of Easy Company that Band of Brothers was based on. They describe men who were apologizing for being wounded and not being able to fight. There were men in that outfit that went AWOL from the hospitals to rejoin their unit at the front. That's a sharp contrast from a nameless political candidate's record.

But WWII and Vietnam are two different types of war - one more traditional and the other a guerilla war. I can't fault anyone for wanting to come home as soon as possible as long as they aren't deserting. If it's true that you learn a lot about someone's character in war, then I think it speaks volumes that the men who actually served on the boat with Kerry, support him. His most vocal opponent from the military served on his boat AFTER Kerry had transferred home. Bush can't even find anyone who served with him in the Guard to come forward and validate that he finished his service.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

You are not going to trapse in here with that never have served line of horse manure and declare that Vietnam and WWII are two different types of war and get away with it. From a comabat point of view they were identical. You will find that the campaigns in the Pacific were nerely identical to combat situations in Vietnam. In WWII in South East Asia we were running a guerilla war against the Japanese in the CBI theater of operations. We were training, equipping and running nationalist guerilla forces in China, Burma and India. Do a google search on Merrill's Marauders and come back and tell me WWII wasn't a guerilla war.

Do you want me to outline the series of brutal Japanese POW stories? Contrast and compare the nature of captivity between those POW's and the Vetnamese? Do you think the soldiers in both conflicts weren't aware of what would happen to them if they were captured? So how does that fear make Vietnam a different war.

Quite frankly you don't know what you're talking aboout. You're completely ignorant of the reality of war. War is war. Vietnam had guerilla and regular army elements. So did our invasion of Germany in WW II. Ditto Okinawa. The reason for the atomic bombs was so we wouldn't have slaughtered millions of Japanese civillians forced to attack American troops with pitchforks.

Don't give me this line of liberal spew that they were different wars. Bullets, artillery, grenades, RPG's are just as real if wielded by regulars as rebels. The combat is the same and you're just as dead. When it comes down to small unit combat war is indistinguishable in what type of war is being fought.

Oh and last but not least there is someone that came forward about the time Bush supposedly didn't show up to his reassignment in Alabama. The press didn't want to make front page news of it as it would have ruined the story that Bush went AWOL. Here's your link. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-02-13-bush-military_x.htm)

[Duo_Maxwell]

The combat wasn't that similar even in the pacific. WW II had nothing like the transportation that we had in Vietnam, whcih totally altered combat. Beach and coastal landings were were a lot of the major fighting took place in WW II and in Vietnam troops were often transported inland to landing zones via helicopter. I wasn't there firsthand, but landing on the beach in a ship and being lifted into a canopy type jungle would've made for largely different combat I'm sure. The terrain was probably quite similar, but combat methods of the enemy and the technology would not have lent itself to similar experiences.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

What do you think men did when they landed either by helicopter or Higgins boat? They fought with rifles, grenades and other small arms. If we take troops today into combat by Blackhawk, Bradley or LCAC once they're out the combat is no different than it was 50 years ago. When boots are on the ground the game remains relatively the same.

Hell, tank to tank combat is not that much different now than it was in WWII with the exception being that you can actually hit targets with accuracy when you're moving. Other than that the tactics haven't really changed since the time of Rommel and Patton.

[MrBadExample]

I was contrasting the European combat theater (a la Band of Brothers) with Vietnam. I should have made that clearer but thanks for being such an ass while pointing it out.

And I didn't know it was liberal to say one war was fought differently from another.

[dennis_t]

Check out my lengthy edit to my previous post.

I am not singly dismissive of Kerry's service. However for much of the honorable service he had it was offset by what POW McCain was subjected to. The silver and bronze star are not given out lightly, I didn't feel the need to challenge them so take that tacit ommission that I think they were earned. The Purple Heart though can put in for by a soldier and they are almost NEVER brought up for review or questioned by any review process.

We're going to have to agree to disagree over the value of Kerry's actions once he returned to public life. I think he was as traitorous as the come. There are plenty of ways to make those opinions known in official channels and with Congressmen behind closed doors. He chose the public route that put soldiers at additional risk and gave aid and comfort to then enemy IMHO.

Now contrast this with the POW footage we got from downed pilots in Desert Storm and last year. Every single person watching them read statement knew damn well whatever they said was not being said of their own free will. The guys in the Hanoi Hilton were tortured into saying whatever it was they were forced to say. They weren't sure if the folks back home would understand what it was had been done to them to get them to betray their country. John Kerry came home and basically said the same thing the NVA wanted POW's to say but wouldn't and did it of his own free will.

As it is now troops are told if they're ever put in front of a camera say what the enemy wants you to say regardless of what it is. Everyone back home will know its a lie. Meanwhile I would love to come up with a comparison of what POW's were forced to say versus what John Kerry said willingly and have people identify each.

John Kerry earned his right to say whatever he wants, I'm not going to dispute that. However you have to ask in any situation that just because you can say something does it mean you should. That's where the main issue of contention comes.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I think speaking publicly -- and taking the abuse that comes with it -- is a heck of a lot more morally courageous than making your complaints through non-public "back channels," where your voice can be easily ignored.

Further, I consider the whole morale issue to be a red herring. Who is to say some (or most) Vietnam troops didn't hear Kerry's words and feel glad someone was articulating their opinion to the American public? Who is to say he didn't give voice to a frustration that many of the men still in Vietnam were feeling? We know that Kerry wasn't the only soldier there who came to the conclusion that the Vietnam War was a horrible mistake full or brutality and horror. I belive that in America, you can support the troops as much by criticism as by blind patriotism.

Case in point: Harry Truman, when he was in Congress, spearheaded investigations into war profiteering that made the military very uncomfortable. But afterward, a general came up and thanked him for his efforts, saying that Truman saved lives by publicly questioning how things were done.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

Who's being an ass MBE. You declared that they were different wars. That the experiences of soldiers therefore were not relatable. Is that not what you meant? Did you not mean to infer that the soldiers in WWII had a more noble puropse and sense of mission that those in Vietnam lacked? Did you not mean to infer that soldiers in Vietnam defied American military tradtion of wanting to protect the lives of their comrades less than those in World War II? Did you not mean to infer that John Kerry was typical in mindest of soldiers of that era in that "getting the hell out" was fine, noble and a proper thing to do regardless of what it meant to them men they left behind?

Were you not trying to state that John Kerry taking a questionable deferrment and exit from a war zone to come back to publicly denounce the men he served with, the men that were in harms way and the men that were helpless as POW's subjected to recordings of his words late at night in cells by themselves was indeed a true patriot for having done so? That's not what you meant when you said? But WWII and Vietnam are two different types of war - one more traditional and the other a guerilla war. I can't fault anyone for wanting to come home as soon as possible as long as they aren't deserting.

Is it liberal to say one war was fought differently from another? No. Are you now saying you weren't trying to compare and contrast eras and the men that served in them? Are you going to tell us that the purpose of this comparison was not to make John Kerry to be just another GI and his mindset of cutting and running 5 months into a one year TOD due to questionable circumstances the norm in Vietnam and the veterans that served there all would have done the same thing?

I mean I've given him huge passes for his service mainly due to the fact that he put on the uniform and didn't bolt to Canada or write to his draft board representatives and state how he "loathed the military" like Bill Clinton did. However if you absolutely insist on saying he was a brave and noble a soldier as Audie Murphy or Sergeant York I'm going to call bullshit on you and tell you why.

[ EDIT: We know that Kerry wasn't the only soldier there who came to the conclusion that the Vietnam War was a horrible mistake full or brutality and horror.

There isn't a professional soldier in the world that comes to the conclusion that war is a horrible mistake and full full of brutality and horror. They all know that without ever having seen combat. You train hard, you keep sharper than any knife in the drawer in hopes you will never bee used as a weapon of war.

I never wanted to fire a shot in anger. You keep a standing military precisely so other nations look at it, know what your capability is and don't mess with you. That's the role of a standing army. We are not trained to invade, occupy or engage in imperial conquest despite what the "loyal" opposition tells you about the American armed forces.

The idea of a Robert Duvall type colonel from Apocalypse Now or the George S Paton portrayed by George C. Scott as loving war are far removed from reality and in the latter case, historical reality.

[MrBadExample]

Kerry was wounded three times so he was eligible to be transferred. He didn't have his daddy's friends wound him, or say he was wounded. He has Bronze and Silver Stars and this kind of nitpicking his record does a disservice to all veterans. Bush can't run on his own record in Vietnam so he has to denigerate Kerry's. It's disgusting. I can't wait for the debates.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

Do you want to go back and read the article I already posted about his Purple Hearts? Did I not mention to you that Purple Hearts are not put in front of a review board? That a soldier and a doctor or corpsman signing the form is all that is necessary for it to be awarded and entered into the record? Did you not read that none of his wounds caused him admitted him into the hospital? Did you not read that his first wound was almost summarily dismissed as being Purple Heart worthy by a man that later became a Rear Admiral? Are you continuing to ignore the fact that the second claim was made after the boats Kerry was on expended 15,000 rounds of .50 calibur ammunition and didn't result in one enemy casualty?

Why is it these things are hard to addreess directly for you? I mean you stated no one was able to state they saw George W. Bush on an AFB in Alabama and therefore he was AWOL. I produced an AP article printed in the USA Today where a Colonel, and the flight safety officer of the base in question, recalls spending significant amounts of time with Bush. They had lunch together, they read manuals together and magazines. Bush was unable to fly in Alabama as it was not his assigned unit. Meanwhile he also had a six year tour of duty and did two years of that active duty in flight training. He completed 5 years and 4 months of a six year enlistment and was honroably discharged. Kerry did 5 months of a one year tour of duty and said his scratches qualified him to go home. I've provided proof for all my statments from credible sources including the Boston Herald and USA Today which are not Bush friendly publications.

I'm not nitpicking the issue, you're refusing to address what I've put fourth. You're maintaining that an objective look at a military record is doing a diservice to veterans while completely dismissing National Guard service as "daddy getting him out of Vietnam". George Bush has never, not once, nowhere in any quote you will find has ever disparaged the service of John Kerry.

Nor am I disparaging the service of John Kerry. I have gone out of my way to tell you that his military service with me IS NOT an issue. He put on the uniform, he fired shots in anger and was fired upon. Again, in sharp contrast to Bill Clinton's "loathing" of the military.

However if you want to tell me how bravely he served, how noble he is I will ask you politely to closely examine the record he runs on. I have stated, again, that his Silver and Bronze stars with me are honorably earned as the process for earning them cannot be as easily massaged as a Purple Heart citation.

The only reason you and Kerry supporters continue to beat the drum of "veteran, veteran, veteran" is that the Democratic party hasn't been able to put fourth a nomineee since Jimmy Carter that had a military record of note. You're running away from the historical 60's legacy of a Clinton type candidate as fast your party possibly can in a time of war.

Meanwhile you bleat like sheep on this aspect of his public life while running away from the fact that he voted against 27 major weapons systems that now make up the bulk of our major weapons sytems on active duty and front line defenses. You conviently neglect to remember that John Kerry wanted to shrink the intelligence budget more than 15% before 9/11 beyond even the scope of what Ted Kennedy was willing to support. You forget that this war that your candidate is now questioning very publicly was voted on by him in the affirmative. You ignore that he then voted against funding troops in harm way when he "Voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it.". Meanwhile you claim that troops in Iraq were sent unprepared, underequipped while your candidate would have put them in harms way and then voted to stop supplying them leaving them withering on the vine.

It's not the debates I'm looking forward to MBE, its the Democratic convention next week. There will be no bounce. There will be no jubilation over rising poll numbers. We're going to get another Gore shriekfest and the loons will come out and prove that the democratsunderground.com and moveon.org wing of the Democratic party are setting the agenda and the tone of the argument. At that point public support for Kerry will begin to wither like plum becoming a prune.

But the good news is that you'll be able to come here and tell me with great pride and certainty that John Kerry has an admirable record from his service in Vietnam.

[Kevtones]

My breakdown

Bush in a nutshell:

~ He is a douche
~ His VP is crazy
~ He has an ego
~ He doesn't care about being hypocritical or active, he does what he wants
~ He is a puppet
~ He is probably a great partyer
~ Lacks fluidity
PRO:
~ He is helping the economy now
~ You know what to expect

Kerry in a nutshell:
~ He is a douche
~ His VP is the biggest douche ever
~ He is a "teeter-totter"
~ He has negative charisma
~ He is a douche, seriously
~ He gives you NO security on any issues and you don't know what to expect

PROs:
~ He's not George Bush
~ He is a war hero kind of

[MrBadExample]

One? One guy says he saw Bush serve out his duty in the Guard? That's all? One guy? It seems like someone else would remember him. I can't prove that he wasn't there, but the evidence that he was is pretty flimsy as well.

Bush is smart enough to not disparage kerry directly. That's what the GOP flunkies are for.

[dennis_t]

Meanwhile you bleat like sheep on this aspect of his public life while running away from the fact that he voted against 27 major weapons systems that now make up the bulk of our major weapons sytems on active duty and front line defenses. You conviently neglect to remember that John Kerry wanted to shrink the intelligence budget more than 15% before 9/11 beyond even the scope of what Ted Kennedy was willing to support. You forget that this war that your candidate is now questioning very publicly was voted on by him in the affirmative. You ignore that he then voted against funding troops in harm way when he "Voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it.". Meanwhile you claim that troops in Iraq were sent unprepared, underequipped while your candidate would have put them in harms way and then voted to stop supplying them leaving them withering on the vine.

Okay, PAD, point-by-point:
(1) Republicans, including your man Cheney, also voted against most of those weapons systems and also voted to shrink the intelligence budget. To single Kerry's votes out without placing them in that context is a smear. He wasn't some wacky radical out to ruin the military, he was part of a process that was taking a hard look at what military and intelligence expenditures were needed and which weren't. This GOP talking point sounds great until you look at the facts back of it.
(2)Kerry, like all congressmen, voted for the war on the basis of intelligence that has now been found to be faulty and inaccurate. Had congressmen been given accurate information about WMDs and Saddam's threat level to America, there's a good chance they would not have supported the war.
(3)The reason he voted against the $87 million was because he wanted part of it financed by repealing a portion of the tax cuts implemented during the Bush administration -- a reasonable stance, given our country's increasing debt. It was not done out of any lack of interest in the security of the troops, and to say otherwise is another GOP talking-point smear.
Additionally, Bush himself threatened to veto the $87 billion bill if it included money to pay for health care for reservists and required Iraq to pay back some of the money set aside for its reconstruction. Does that make him a flip-flopper and a hater of the military?
(4)Finally, I don't think Kerry would have sent our troops in and left them to die on the vine. I think he would have held off action, let the weapons inspectors do their job and, if necessary, went in with an international coalition so we wouldn't be left holding the bag alone in Iraq. There wouldn't have been a vote on $87 million because we wouldn't be footing the whole bill. But Bush couldn't wait to get his war on, so we all are stuck with the bill.

[Cracka]

well looking at the poll results, i guess we're lucky some psycho Hilter-like person isnt running against Bush, cause he'd have half of your votes.