Turn About Fair Play?

[Tendarian]

Think its fair? I do :) And yes this came from Drudge,but still lets discuss the story and how it might be hypocritical of Kerry not to disclose after what the dems demanded of Bush.


After months of Dems haggling over President Bush's military records, the GOP now moves to demand full-disclosure from John Kerry!

The day after Kerry told MEET THE PRESS 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.

Republican National Committee Chair Ed Gillespie is planning to deliver a speech later today calling on Kerry to make good on his promise to release all his records.

[The Bush military records commotion intensified earlier this year after DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe challenged Bush to show records after Bush made a similar promise on MEET THE PRESS.]

Coming Gillespie in a speech to be delivered in Ohio:

"John Kerry's pattern of caveats, qualifications, disclaimers, policy reversals and vacillation are not the qualities voters are looking for in times of change that demand steady leadership.

"The Boston Globe reports today that when a reporter went to Kerry's headquarters yesterday to follow up on the pledge Kerry had made on Meet the Press Sunday that he would make all his military records available, 'the campaign staff declined' and said 'the only records available would be those already released to this newspaper.' The campaign is withholding formal evaluations from superior officers and other documents they have yet to release.

"Guess it depends on what your definition of the word 'all' is.

"When President Bush committed to release all his military records on the same program, he kept his word. John Kerry should do the same. Voters aren't stupid, and he shouldn't treat us as if we are."

ON HIS WIFE'S TAX RETURNS, HE HAS SAID 'NO'. ON HIS HEALTH RECORDS, HE HAS SAID 'NO'. ON HIS COMPREHENSIVE MILITARY RECORDS INCLUDING NAVAL RESERVE RECORDS, HE HAS SAID 'NO'..

[AnticorRifling]

The longer you give someone to get their records together the longer they have to hide something.

I can give you copies of my military records, medical, dental, taxes from the last 7 years, etc in under an hour. It's called a filing cabinet and good record keeping.

[Atlanteax]

I'm betting that there's some potentionally embarrassing documents that may "de-glorify" Kerry's service in Vietnam, and thus effectively erode any credibility he has trying to campaign as a War Vet.

[AnticorRifling]

Where did Wezas' post go? It was right above mine.

[Wezas]

Sorry for deleting my post, Anticor, I just read the part about him saying that people can "come and see them at headquarters".

Thought I deleted it before anyone could respond, but then a few seconds later I refreshed and saw your response.

The quote was in the actual artical from the globe, not in the link that Tend
supplied.

My original post just said to give the man some time to pull shit together.

[Edited on 4-20-2004 by Wezas]

[Edited on 4-20-2004 by Wezas]

[Valthissa]

Originally posted by Atlanteax
I'm betting that there's some potentionally embarrassing documents that may "de-glorify" Kerry's service in Vietnam, and thus effectively erode any credibility he has trying to campaign as a War Vet.

a cynic might bet the opoosite.

what draws more attention:

quietly providing a lot of innocuous information or -

letting the story build in the media and then releasing a lot of dull records?

not that politicians of either party would make these types of calculations.


C/Valth - betting that this is a not a big deal because if it were perhaps the GOP might wait until the electorate were actually paying attention.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I wish politicians weren't all so crooked, would make elections and debates so much more interesting. Instead, I find myself voting for the lesser of two evils, instead of voting for someone I'd admire and WANT leading the country.

Just a rant.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Atlanteax
I'm betting that there's some potentionally embarrassing documents that may "de-glorify" Kerry's service in Vietnam, and thus effectively erode any credibility he has trying to campaign as a War Vet.

Credibility?

If a poll came out today that said most Americans were against people having served in the military (aka Vietnam era).. Kerry would once again bash that which he now promotes.

Where is the credibility in that?

[Artha]

Sorry for deleting my post, Anticor, I just read the part about him saying that people can "come and see them at headquarters".

Yeah, about that (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/04/20/kerry_refuses_to_release_more_records/)...

[i remember halloween]

yea, he intentionally got his purple hearts so he could go home. i read that at least 2 of them weren't even in combat. i don't want to start shooting allegations before i have a good source, but he was no hero from what i saw on tv. i'll be sure to post something more concrete when i run across it again.

notice how the Lib's are avoiding this thread?

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by The Edine
notice how the Lib's are avoiding this thread? Kerry sux.

[Skirmisher]

I'm not voting for Kerry.

I'm voting against Bush.

I will say its amusing to see someone who could not even complete his bogus national guard tour of duty trying to get on someone who at least went overseas.;)

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Skirmisher
I will say its amusing to see someone who could not even complete his bogus national guard tour of duty trying to get on someone who at least went overseas.;) I'd rather Kerry stayed home if he was such a crappy sailor.

[Hulkein]

Unless you're voting for Nader or whoever is running for the Libertarians, or a write in.. you're voting for Kerry.

It's more complex then that Skirmisher. Kerry is hiding this for reasons unknown. Bush served as an Air National Guard, he released his record. It doesn't really matter if his position wasn't tough enough for you or not, and here it's not really the point.

We know Kerry WENT to Vietnam, the question here is why won't he be open as to what happened. Also, why won't he let people peer into many aspects of his life.

You want to vote for someone with that much to hide, go ahead.

[Skirmisher]

Like Bush couldnt find the base he was supposed to report to in Alabama?:up:

[Artha]

Didn't we disprove this like 50 times when it was the 'in' argument?

[Skirmisher]

Um....no.

[Artha]

I think we did. And my memory kicks ass, so you must be wrong :)

[Ravenstorm]

What's to hide from? I'm voting for Kerry not because of his war record. I'm not voting against Bush because of his. I'm all for Kerry doing what he said and releasing the records. I chose my new sig for a reason and Democrat or Republican, I think most politician's suck.

Notice how I have never once, in any thread, argued how great Kerry was or what a wonderful president he'll make? It's quite simple. I want Bush out and I'll vote for a striped lemur if it had a chance of doing it.

So bash Kerry all you want. I couldn't give a shit, really. Though if you are going to do so? Do it in a way that doesn't also apply equally to Bush as it's kind of hypocritical. Kerry flip-flop? Do I need to go find where Bush criticized Clinton about being too involved in foreign affairs? And now, all of a sudden, he's the voice of God's will in freeing the Middle East. Great consistency there. And his sudden one eighty on the gay marriage issue is another sterling example of how Bush lies. Excuse me, flip-flops.

Politician's suck. Kerry sucks. Bush just sucks most.

Raven

[Hulkein]

<<Do I need to go find where Bush criticized Clinton about being too involved in foreign affairs? And now, all of a sudden, he's the voice of God's will in freeing the Middle East.>>

9/11 changed his views, obviously.

<<And his sudden one eighty on the gay marriage issue>>

Which was spurred by the rogue actions of judges.

[Artha]

See, a little thing happened between Bush's criticism of Clinton's foreign policy and now...I call it 9-11. Kerry's flip-flops, however, are much more numerous and have less to do with foreign policy and more to do with opinion polls.

I can't imagine voting for someone who you know will do a bad job just because he isn't the other guy. That's pretty sad, actually.

[Skirmisher]

Yes, it speaks volumes about how bad I think the one guy is.

It's quite sad.

[Artha]

It speaks volumes about how you let yourself be blinded by hate and hypocrisy.

[Ravenstorm]

As opposed to being blinded by gullibility and the Republican propaganda machine?

Raven

[Hulkein]

LOL, you act like the republican party is any different then the democratic party in terms of size or power. They're pretty much even, no need to portray it as some giant steel fist over trembling citizens.

[Artha]

Oh, right. Because agreeing with the current administration on most issues makes you blinded by propaganda and gullibility. I must've missed that memo.

If I could vote (crie), I'd be voting for Bush because I agree with (most of) what he would do with power, not because I don't want Kerry in office.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Artha

Oh, right. Because agreeing with the current administration on most issues makes you blinded by propaganda and gullibility. I must've missed that memo.


Oh, right. Because DISagreeing with the current administration on most issues make you blinded by hate and hypocrisy. I must have missed that memo.

You do get my point now I hope?

Raven

[Artha]

No. If you're voting for Kerry because you agree with him, that's great. Good luck and all that. If you're voting for Kerry because you want Bush out, even though Kerry is not better for the job, you need to take a long look in the mirror.

[Tendarian]

This is why i think Bush will win. Most democrats dont even seem to like him,they just dont like Bush. The middle of the roaders,the true moderates wont find Kerry anymore likeable than the far left Democrats and therefore Bush will win by a pretty good margian. Unless something big changes between now and election day you will have another 4 more years of Bush.

[Ravenstorm]

Kerry is indeed better for the job. Would he be the better candidate when compared to someone else? Very possibly not. It's also irrelevant. Compared to Bush he's the better man and that's who the election will be between.

There is no doubt in my mind that Kerry will do a better job than Bush has.

Raven

[Artha]

Kerry's had some major number slips since last month, even with the multimillion attack ads. I'm fairly confident Bush'll be going for 4 more years.

[Hulkein]

There's no doubt in my mind Bush will do a better job if he is re-elected next term then Kerry will.

I think that's how people usually decide who they're voting for :duh:

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Artha
I'm fairly confident Bush'll be going for 4 more years. As my father would say, "deflate the balls" (or pucks, or stones, or tractor-trailers), the game's already over.

[TheEschaton]

Do I need to go find where Bush criticized Clinton about being too involved in foreign affairs?

I remember the Daily Show once did a clip of a debate of George W. Bush vs. George W. Bush.

And Bush never had to flip flop because the only political positition he held before the President was GOVERNOR, an office practically handed to him, and Governors don't make laws, they execute 'em (and retarded people as well, apparently). Congress has to deal with the actual nitty gritty of the law day in and day out. It is much more sensitive to change.

I dare you to name me a member of congress whos congressional record stretches however many years Kerry's does (20 something years?) and tell me they haven't changed their views on the issues in that time.

-TheE-

[Tendarian]

Its not just flip flopping over a 20 year period though. Its the flip flopping over stuff in a matter of less than a year. Take Iraq for example. And its happened numerous times depending on what the polls are saying that week.

[Hulkein]

You can't, that's why usually calling someone a flip flop in office isn't a big insult.

He however has flip flopps on issues of large scale again and again.

[TheEschaton]

Take Iraq for example.

Like everyone so eloquently stated how 9/11 caused Bush to flip flop almost 180 degrees, "something happened" inbetween Kerry voting for Iraq and him now disagreeing with it. That something being that A) almost all, if not all, the intelligence "proving" the war was wrong, and B) there is an indication the White House knew their case was weak and spun as hard as they could to make it pass muster. And I have to say, they did a pretty damn good job, for the majority of the country, but a few million people in the streets weren't fooled. ;)

-TheE-

[i remember halloween]

kerry has no positions. he backs only what is popular at that time. a reactive president is the last thing we need, even much less so than a shoot first ask questions later type of guy.

[Tendarian]

Now now the Woodword book just said Bush was told be Tenet that the case for WMD in Iraq was a "slam dunk". And this is coming from a liberal so how can you say otherwise? Even so though you shouldnt vote to send troops somewhere and then decide it was wrong and not send them money to help them while they are still over though.

Btw that was a very good question. I mean who is gonna look up every congressmen who has been in office 20+ years and then look up their voting record and compare just to prove a point on a message board.

[TheEschaton]

What does crow taste like? (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040421/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_purple_hearts&cid=694&ncid=716)


-TheE-

[TheEschaton]

Even so though you shouldnt vote to send troops somewhere and then decide it was wrong and not send them money to help them while they are still over though.


Need we go into Bush's slashing of/denying more hazardous duty pay to current soldiers, and the slashing of veteran's benefits? No, I think not, because Bush vetoed those bills for concerns other than those parts of the bill, just as Kerry voted AGAINST EIGHTY SEVEN BILLION DOLLARS to wage the Iraq war, NOT because of the equipment issue, which was a few million, but the tens of millions that was going towards American contractors with ties to Bush Administration to...you guessed it, secure oil fields. The difference is, though, Bush's concerns were economic, because the economy was in the cellar, where he put it, and Kerry's concerns were idealistic. Give me idealistic any day.

That's the problem with politics. Everyone is always saying "Oh, well, he voted against feeding little children", ignoring the fact that the main bill was to cut all federal funding for afterschool programs, with a rider on it that said "Give 'em a snack before they go home." There's a larger picture to EVERYTHING.

-TheE-

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by TheEschaton]

[Tendarian]

Great now all that he has to do is get his wife to release her tax records and all will be well.

[TheEschaton]

What's the deal with her tax records? Can't say I see how it's related (or know this part of the conservative conspiracy theory).

-TheE-

[Tendarian]

So Kerry didnt want to help rebuild what he voted to help destroy and thats idealistic?

[TheEschaton]

No, not wanting contracts to go from the gov't to cronies of the Administration without bidding, is idealistic.

Kerry also later said he voted nay in protest, knowing full well the bill would pass.

Edited to add: Unfortunately, Kerry isn't the United States in the U.N. Security Council, and his nay vote can't nullify the whole thing. ;)

-TheE-

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by TheEschaton]

[Tendarian]

Originally posted by TheEschaton
What's the deal with her tax records? Can't say I see how it's related (or know this part of the conservative conspiracy theory).

-TheE-

Heres a link to this conspiracy :)

http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2004/04/16/20040416_143806_rc8r.htm

[TheEschaton]

Do they file jointly? Does John have a business say in Heinz? Is a wife contributing money to her husband's campaign considered an outside contribution?

I think you'll find the answer to these questions to be no, no, and no. But then again, I'm not a tax lawyer.

-TheE-

[Tendarian]

"As president, openness will be the hallmark of my administration, not some talking point... The highest office in the land requires the highest level of openness for the American people."

[TheEschaton]

Can he even compel her to disclose her records? Since she's all rich and all that, I can imagine she files separately - meaning he has no ability to disclose her tax records, let alone the right. Furthermore, releasing her tax records can adversely affect her business.

-TheE-

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by TheEschaton]

[Tendarian]

Yep you are right there. But can the dems make Bush release his military records? Can the repubs make Kerry release his? Nope but they both did. In the link i put they said Ferarro's husband didnt want to either for fear of what would happen to his business. I wonder what happened there. I know it wouldnt bother me if Kerry owned the ketchup himself,i still like ketchup and its not like he is the devil.

[Ilvane]

Originally posted by Artha
Kerry's had some major number slips since last month, even with the multimillion attack ads. I'm fairly confident Bush'll be going for 4 more years.

:lol: Bush has done a few million in attack ads himself.

Polls are polls, and you can take them with a grain of salt. It will be a close election, but hopefully Kerry will win. I don't think I could deal with another 4 years of Bush and his environmental policies.

-A

[Ilvane]

The Drudge reports are basically full of it, especially since Kerry was planning on releasing his records. It took him a full 2 days to do so.:grin: Wow, so long!
~~~
They show Kerry had shrapnel wounds in his left thigh after his boat came under intense fire on Feb. 20, 1969, and he suffered shrapnel wounds in his left buttock and contusions on his right forearm when a mine detonated close to his boat on March 13, 1969.
~~~
Along with his final Purple Heart, Kerry received the Bronze Star after being wounded by the mine. One of his boatmates was thrown overboard in the blast, but Kerry pulled him to safety.


Kerry did this with "his arm bleeding and in pain and with disregard for his personal safety," according to the citation. Kerry and the man who went overboard, retired Los Angeles police officer Jim Rassmann, had an emotional public reunion in January, two days before Kerry would win the Iowa caucuses.
~~~

No, he's not a war hero. Republicans are so quick to jump on Kerry because he protested the war after he served and was a war hero. I personally could see why one would protest Vietnam after serving there. Who better to know what was really going on?

I don't think Kerry is perfect, either. I just feel that his ideas are more along the line of what I believe in.

-A

[FinisWolf]

Originally posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage
I wish politicians weren't all so crooked, would make elections and debates so much more interesting. Instead, I find myself voting for the lesser of two evils, instead of voting for someone I'd admire and WANT leading the country.

Just a rant.

The sad thing is, I, and I am sure alot of others, do the same thing.

Finiswolf

how about Kerry's recent flip flop on the patriot act?
He votes for it when it is sent through congress.
Kerry Used To Defend His Vote. “Most of [The Patriot Act] has to do with improving the transfer of information between CIA and FBI, and it has to do with things that really were quite necessary in the wake of what happened on September 11th.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Town Hall Meeting, Manchester, NH, 8/6/03)

Then,
Kerry Attacks Patriot Act. “We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night. So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time. I’ve been a District Attorney and I know that what law enforcement needs are real tools not restrictions on American’s basic rights.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Iowa State University, 12/1/03)


At least I know what President Bush stands for. I can not figure out what kerry is about, I guess it all depends on the day of the week.

Ilavne, the problem is Kerry did not release all the info at least not last I checked

Kerry's former CO Lt. Cmdr. Grant Hibbard said to the Boston Globe that "Kerry's first Purple Heart came from minor wound resembling a fingernail scrape."

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by The Edine]

[Skirmisher]

The only thing I think this shows is that the Bush campaign has realized they cannot possibly look any worse on the issue of Bush ducking out on even the incredibly minimal national guard requirements set before him.

Why else even attempt to bring up the record of someone who actually served?

This is not some huge GO Kerry support post as thats not where I'm at, but simply trying to understand why someone would bring up a point upon which they have already borne such heavy criticism.

[longshot]

Originally posted by The Edine
how about Kerry's recent flip flop on the patriot act?
He votes for it when it is sent through congress.
Kerry Used To Defend His Vote. “Most of [The Patriot Act] has to do with improving the transfer of information between CIA and FBI, and it has to do with things that really were quite necessary in the wake of what happened on September 11th.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Town Hall Meeting, Manchester, NH, 8/6/03)

Then,
Kerry Attacks Patriot Act. “We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night. So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time. I’ve been a District Attorney and I know that what law enforcement needs are real tools not restrictions on American’s basic rights.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Iowa State University, 12/1/03)


At least I know what President Bush stands for. I can not figure out what kerry is about, I guess it all depends on the day of the week.

Things change. The four months in between the quotes, given what we learned about our fradulent reasons for the war in Iraq, should be enough to justify a change in opinion.

I don't see it as a weakness that Kerry changes position on issues. He is an elected representative who is best trying to position himself to support those who endorse him.

I feel much more comfortable with someone that is able to change, rather than "stay the path" on a road to disaster.

I can't imagine Kerry saying that he was "divinely inspired" to start a war.

The patriot act had nothing to do with Iraq Longshot.
The president is not there to work for those that support him, he is there to work for all. He needs to figure out where he stands and stick with it.

And Srkim Bush opened all his records. It has been shown that he was there, by the records, pay stubs and by people who served with him. His being there is not in question anymore, you should pay closer attention to the facts than the propaganda.
:moon:

[longshot]

Originally posted by The Edine
The patriot act had nothing to do with Iraq Longshot.

The president is not there to work for those that support him, he is there to work for all. He needs to figure out where he stands and stick with it.



I understand that the Patriot Act has nothing to do with Iraq.

That's about the same time that I no longer trusted the current administration. I just couldn't do it anymore.

I'm not some bleeding heart liberal, either.

Im not saying you are. You do look for diffrent qualities in a leader than I do though that is obvious. I dont trust kerry in the least bit, I do trust Bush.

but enough of that back to the topic and him not letting out all of his military records as he demanded of others.

[Skirmisher]

Originally posted by The Edine
And Srkim Bush opened all his records. It has been shown that he was there, by the records, pay stubs and by people who served with him. His being there is not in question anymore, you should pay closer attention to the facts than the propaganda.
:moon:

I'll be the first to admit I may have missed somethng.

Would you be so kind as to direct me to the news outlet where i can read that?

I'd appreciate it, thanks.:grin:

[Wezas]

Originally posted by The Edine
Kerry Used To Defend His Vote. “Most of [The Patriot Act] has to do with improving the transfer of information between CIA and FBI, and it has to do with things that really were quite necessary in the wake of what happened on September 11th.”

“We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night. So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time. I’ve been a District Attorney and I know that what law enforcement needs are real tools not restrictions on American’s basic rights.”


We back to the flip-flopping debate, Edine?

You see your first statement said "Most of the Patriot Act?" You see your second statement said "replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time."

You can vote for something even though you may not agree with all of it, if for the most part you think it is good. Can you then never say that there are ways to improve that Act?

Edine, you can talk about flip-flopping all you want, but most of what you spout can be refuted in the exact quotes you give. I do give you props for giving the exact quotes though, saves me time looking them up.

[Wezas]

Originally posted by The Edine
Im not saying you are. You do look for diffrent qualities in a leader than I do though that is obvious. I dont trust kerry in the least bit, I do trust Bush.

but enough of that back to the topic and him not letting out all of his military records as he demanded of others.

Um, go to the middle of page 2, there is a link to a story about him releasing them today (or yesterday).

here it is.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040421/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_purple_hearts&cid=694&ncid=716

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by Wezas]

he defended his vote for it Wezas. Then he wanted to get rid of it, now he wants to rewrite it.
to this day there has not been one complaint against any law enforcment agency in relaiton to the patriot act.

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by The Edine]

[Prestius]

quote]Originally posted by The Edine
how about Kerry's recent flip flop on the patriot act?
He votes for it when it is sent through congress.
Kerry Used To Defend His Vote. “Most of [The Patriot Act] has to do with improving the transfer of information between CIA and FBI, and it has to do with things that really were quite necessary in the wake of what happened on September 11th.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Town Hall Meeting, Manchester, NH, 8/6/03)

Then,
Kerry Attacks Patriot Act. “We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night. So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time. I’ve been a District Attorney and I know that what law enforcement needs are real tools not restrictions on American’s basic rights.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Iowa State University, 12/1/03)


At least I know what President Bush stands for. I can not figure out what kerry is about, I guess it all depends on the day of the week. [/quote]

Interesting - you've really bought into the "flip-flop" hype, haven't you? These two quotes are in no way contradictory. Note in the first quote, the term "most" - i.e. "most of the Patriot Act was ..."

His second quote refers to sections of the Patriot Act that are clearly aggregious violations of civil liberties - specifically Section 215.

The Act is over 300 pages and affects soemthing like 15 different statutes and it was shoved through congress with little to no debate - all in the political climate of Sept/Oct 2001 - right after the 9/11 attacks. Clearly we needed some legislation to make sure we could find terrorists in our Country. After closer inspection Kerry, recognized there were some problems with certain areas of it that definately need to be fixed. And this is a bad thing?

While you may prefer someone who picks a position and sticks with it, no matter how much data proves it to be a bad decision, I prefer a president who actually looks at the complexities of a situation and isn't afraid to change his approach when new and better information comes to light.

I'll give you another example - one more personal. I've railed against the Iraq War since the moment it was uttered as a possibility - recognizing that it is tangental at best to the war on terrorism and was a long-term neo-con goal that was only politicaly tenable in the wake of 9/11. If new data comes to light that shows a definate, verifiable link between Saddam/ Iraq and al Quaeda/Osama or actual WMD's, I'll admit that I was wrong and support the war. Does that make me a flip-flopper? Or should I stay the course and keep my anti-Iraq stance?

Actually, Kerry's voting record, and his public statements give a pretty clear picture of where he stands. You want the list?

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/

It's all there. I can honestly look at his general apprach and say that it more closely represents where I stand on most those same issues.

-P

[Wezas]

Originally posted by The Edine
I will not to this day there has not been one complaint against any law enforcment agency in relaiton to the patriot act.

It's only a matter of time. I want the FBI & CIA talking and I want them to be able to investigate possible terrorism here in the states. Do I want them going on my computer and looking at my porn? Do I want them setting up video equipment in my house and tapping my phone? We need to look at the liberties and freedom of the american people and make sure this Act includes them.

[Prestius]

Originally posted by The Edine
Ilavne, the problem is Kerry did not release all the info at least not last I checked

Kerry's former CO Lt. Cmdr. Grant Hibbard said to the Boston Globe that "Kerry's first Purple Heart came from minor wound resembling a fingernail scrape."

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by The Edine]

http://www.johnkerry.com/about/military_records.html

He could not "locate" the records for his first purple heart


The campaign could not locate a similar report for Kerry's original Purple Heart
Now bush was given a hard time because he could not find documents. I want to know where the liberal outcry about it is, I want the people to DEMAND that kerry show proof that his injuries were worthy of a purple heart. Just like people demanded proof that Bush was in alabama.

yes yes but he leaves out the medical records <severity of injuries> and the reasons for the first purple heart.

[Skirmisher]

Whenever you get a chance just drop that link in here for me Edine?

Thanks.

[Wezas]

Originally posted by Skirmisher
Whenever you get a chance just drop that link in here for me Edine?

Thanks.

Does this thread really need another Drudge Report link?

[Skirmisher]

I am assuming it will be a link from a reputable news source as Edine would accept no less.

[i remember halloween]

this country elected a president who fled to canada during a draft. don't act like people actually give a shit about military records because the majority don't.

sure I will use Wezas's link
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040421/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_purple_hearts&cid=694&ncid=716
Why dont you read it, you will note exactly what I said.

[Pierat]

Omg give it up, all the options suck, Vote for Pierat...... Eh nevermind, put Edine in office and ill run the CIA

[Prestius]

Originally posted by The Edine
yes yes but he leaves out the medical records <severity of injuries> and the reasons for the first purple heart.

So .. let me get this straight.

You're quibbling over the severity of an injury and whether it deserved a Purple Heart? One of three? Are you suggesting that this somehow nullifies his claims of service to his country? Or that he somehow got someone to give him a Purple Heart dishonestly? Do you think that he had any decision over the award of the medal?

And do you really want to compare miltary service records between the two candiates? Seriously .. I can understand people not agreeing with Kerry on his platform. I can see them not liking his demeanor or his views. But for all the Hawk-ish stance of the repubs, that they are trying to tear down the military record of someone who actually fought and was wounded in the service of his country - and holding up someone who used his political connections to essentially skip the war - is unconscionable and hypocritical.


And I'll be honest with you, I see a lot more conviction in a man who serves his country honorably in a war he disagrees with and then has the guts to come back and question the government's involvement in said war than in someone who spend his service to his county than basically weasled his way out of doing anything of substance during the war.

Seriously .. The Bush Campaign and the Right need to find another dog to flog here - trying to compare military records between the candidates just makes the Bush team look worse and worse with every passing day.

[Tendarian]

To me its tit for tat. They made a big deal about his record and then when a question came up they asked it. Then Kerry said he would have his records at his headquarters and a reporter went there and they wernt. If they had been it wouldnt be an issue. Now that they are it isnt a question for me anymore. If they had been all along no one would have probably even heard about it cept those who listen to the far right radio shows. I also agree with who ever said this country doesnt much care about military records as they elected someone who went to canada to dodge the draft. It was the same as when the dems wanted Bush to give up his records they just wanted to earn political points. Its an election year,get used to it.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by TheEschaton
I dare you to name me a member of congress whos congressional record stretches however many years Kerry's does (20 something years?) and tell me they haven't changed their views on the issues in that time.

-TheE-

Which is why most professional politicians like Kerry will never be elected to the Presidency.

Democrats simply need to wait 4 more years.. and their "Savior" Hillary Clinton will be on the ticket. I actually think she will be elected as well... much to my horror.

[Valthissa]

I'd like to point out that I was correct in predicting that Mr. Kerry would produce his records and that there would be nothing interesting in them.

Mrs. Kerry will soon be providing her taxes.

As anyone who was around during Geraldine Ferraro's VP candidacy should remember, it's (politically) impossible to defend the position that one's spouse's business interests are irrelevant
when the spouse of the candidate is extremely wealthy.

C/Valth

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by TheEschaton
Do they file jointly? Does John have a business say in Heinz? Is a wife contributing money to her husband's campaign considered an outside contribution?

I think you'll find the answer to these questions to be no, no, and no. But then again, I'm not a tax lawyer.

-TheE-

If you don't think he is getting money from his own wife.. your more gullible than I first thought.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Ilvane
No, he's not a war hero. Republicans are so quick to jump on Kerry because he protested the war after he served and was a war hero. I personally could see why one would protest Vietnam after serving there. Who better to know what was really going on?
-A

Anyone willing to give up their life for their country is considered a war hero to me. There is no larger self-less act in my book.

I have no problems with Kerry going to the Vietnam war.. my problem with the waffle man started when he came back and used it as a launching pad for his own political agenda. My problem with Kerry is with his own voting record over the past 20 years. My problem with Kerry is that he will always side with whatever the public poll tells him to do.

I don't find being a sheep and following the crowd so.. Presidential.

[Skirmisher]

Taken from the link Edine gives as proof

The records did not provide evidence that Bush attended drills while in Alabama during a period when Democrats have questioned whether he reported for service.

Now, I'm not an attorney .....but I thought it had the words "did not provide evidence" in there.

Perhaps you meant to give another link Edine?

[Tendarian]

Mrs. Kerry will soon be providing her taxes.

:thumbsup: I hope you are right again.

[TheEschaton]

A) Parkbandit, I didn't say I believed his wife wasn't giving him money. I asked if a wife giving her husband money for his campaign is considered an outside contribution, and thus subject to campaign fundraising laws. I think, given the nature of marriage, that it is probably not considered subject to campaign fundraising laws.

B)

The Act is over 300 pages and affects soemthing like 15 different statutes and it was shoved through congress with little to no debate - all in the political climate of Sept/Oct 2001 - right after the 9/11 attacks. Clearly we needed some legislation to make sure we could find terrorists in our Country. After closer inspection Kerry, recognized there were some problems with certain areas of it that definately need to be fixed. And this is a bad thing?

You also know that the Patriot Act was changed, and the members of the House weren't allowed to read or debate the changed issues when it was immediately put to a vote on the floor, right?

The conspiracy theorists claim a version was given to Dennis Hastert, which took out all the changes originally made. According to Ron Paul, a Republican from Texas, the members of the House didn't get to read the new bill before they were told to vote on it. (Washington Times).

-TheE-

[Ilvane]

I was half asleep when I posted earlier. I did mean that I believed John Kerry was a war hero.

(Sarcasm doesn't carry well especially when you are half asleep)

I like Kerry enough to vote for him.:) Those records were proof enough, and definately more comprehensive than Bush.:grin:

-A

[Skirmisher]

Hrm....Edine may be too busy. Perhaps someone else has a link to a reputable news source showing where Bush was shown to have clearly shown he was present for his tour of National Guard Duty in Alabama.

I do so hate to have missed such important news and would like to catch up with that.

Thanks again.

[Wezas]

Skirm, while I think the site may be a bit bias, there are quite a few links to actual documents (pictures of documents) that show his service and dates of his service. A few of his reviews are in it as well.

http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/3671

here you go, This one i enjoyed the most, you can find it on the AP but it is archived so you have to pay for the full text, as well as articles in major news papers

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/13/133507.shtml

[Edited on 4-21-2004 by The Edine]

[Skirmisher]

Originally posted by The Edine
here you go, This one i enjoyed the most, you can find it on the AP but it is archived so you have to pay for the full text, as well as articles in major news papers

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/13/133507.shtml


[Edited on 4-21-2004 by The Edine]

I perhaps was not clear.

Any site that has in the top border a free offer of Sean Hannity's new book is not one which I would think qualifies as unbiased.

The site itself seems to rely upon the word of one person who was not his comander and this also sadly fails to be enough to sway me.

I assumed when you stated so definitively that
It has been shown that he was there, by the records, pay stubs and by people who served with him. His being there is not in question anymore, you should pay closer attention to the facts there would be some later discovered paperwork to discredit the lack of attendance of Pres bush at the base to which he was assigned.

If you could direct me to such a source then I would be glad to agree with your assertion.

Without such documentation I think at best you can hope to claim the situation murky.

[TheEschaton]

That story is humorous, because they GOP offers an uncorraborated, undocumented testimony of a registered Alabaman 69-year-old Republican, who tried THREE TIMES to get his story told, as qualified PROOF that Bush was there.

Convienant how Bush "spent most of his time in my office". Fame mongering, much?

-TheE-

hmm perhaps you missed the AP refrence at the bottom of the page.

[TheEschaton]

Regardless of the source.

If I found a man with the same credentials, except a Democrat, and had him say, "John Kerry saved the lives of every damn person in his platoon, and got shot seventy times doing it", would you believe it without documentation?

Especially if he claimed to be the only witness to it?

-TheE-

[Skirmisher]

Edine,

I am unable to locate that article in searches of Google News, Yahoo News or at AP's website.

I of course may simply using the incorrect keywords so if you are able to show me a link to a site of a slightly more mainstream news outlet I'de really appreciate it.

Thanks again.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040214-122542-7472r.htm
http://www.chicagotribune.com/services/site/premium/access-registered.intercept
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3746274,00.html
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/13/elec04.prez.bush.texas.records/index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,111427,00.html

Originally posted by Pierat
Omg give it up, all the options suck, Vote for Pierat...... Eh nevermind, put Edine in office and ill run the CIA

I like that idea

The Edine for president in '08!
somebody has to beat that bitch hilary

you know to steal a line form Luis Black

"The US needs a president in the white house who is willing to get a hummer every now and then. I think im the man for the job."

[Skirmisher]

Calhoun said he does not have any photographs or documents to prove Bush showed up for duty, but his ex-wife, Patsy Burks, said she remembered Calhoun's account.

So....all the official documents saying that he had not been in attendance at his assigned base are to be explained by the word of one man without so much as a single document or photograph?

Come now.

From your certainty of declaration, I had expected more.

[Artha]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/13/elec04.prez.bush.texas.records/index.html

Everyone knows CNN stands for Crightwing News Network...you're not fooling anyone here.

you asked I delivered Skrim
what offical documents saying he was not in attendence?

Originally posted by Artha


http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/13/elec04.prez.bush.texas.records/index.html

Everyone knows CNN stands for Crightwing News Network...you're not fooling anyone here.

Im sorry Artha :sighs: you have seen through my shield

[Skirmisher]

Well Dave, how about the ones in the links you yourself used?

Like the one Dr saying he was unable to sign off on his review as he had not seen him on base?

[Ravenstorm]

Same article linked ot this one:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/12/elec04.prez.bush.texas.records/index.html

Seems like a he said/he said situation. Not sure I believe either of them but the entire matter is certainly a more questionable issue than that Kerry didn't get hurt badly enough. And on top of it, it took Bush a hell of a lot longer to release his records than it did Kerry. So we can file this one along with the so-called 'affair' he had; right in the trash basket.

I might end up changing my mind. If the worst dirt Bush can manage to come up with to smear Kerry are misleading claims of being a 'waffler', he might make a decent president after all.

Raven

[DeV]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
I might end up changing my mind. If the worst dirt Bush can manage to come up with to smear Kerry are misleading claims of being a 'waffler', he might make a decent president after all.

Raven Now there's a thought. Or, it might make for a smear campaign so boring the voters demand that each candidate create a scandal and whoever comes up with the most damaging one gets your vote.

[Artha]

We still have a few months until November, there's still time for someone to go bang an intern.

heh I remember kerry already doing that...
or maybe it was another one of the dems in the primary///

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by The Edine
or maybe it was another one of the dems in the primary/// Sounds like Clarke, but I wouldn't put it past Mosley-Brown.

[GSTamral]

The Dems have had a larger propaganda machine running for ages.

Historically, the Democratic Party has been a much much greater machine of propaganda than the Republican party.

Democrats also have a far more fanatical following than the Republican party. Blacks, Gays, and Environmentalists are three of the most solid voting blocs around, and they never change their views. The only historically democratic stronghold that is switching sides, albeit slowly, are hispanics.

The strongest bloc for Republicans historically were the elderly, catholics, and devout protestants. Two of those groups are now virtually split down the middle. Only protestants are pro-Bush at this point in time.

From a class perspective in earnings, the lower class is almost entirely democrat, the lower middle class is relatively split, with a slight edge to republicans, the middle class is almost deadlocked, the upper middle class is 2 to 1 in favor of republicans, and the upper class is 3 to 2 in favor of democrats. In total in the nation there are slightly more registered democrats than republicans.

But if you want to talk about a propaganda machine, the media is well known as a general trend to be liberal. How much media attention was given to the Whitewater scandal? How much media attention was placed on Somalia? Yet every book, nook, and cranny that comes out that is anti-republican makes the headlines of the national news. That is precisely why I choose to get my news from either the investors business daily, or reuters, because those are the only places to get news.

"Sept 11 happened because of Bush. Bla blabber Blah Bush sux" - Liberal

"Sept 11 happened and Bush was a great leader through it. Blah Blah Blah vote Bush" - Conservative

"Sept 11 happened" - Rueters.

Raven, I am sorry that you hate Bush so much and that many liberals are blinded by media to think Bush has been so much worse than previous presidents. His performance while not good, is also not nearly as poor as you and many other liberal media venues and proponents of the boards claim.

I know the issue of gay marriage is a personal one to you, and that it probably ranks as the number 1 issue to you in terms of national priority, and I'd like to give you a reality check. I don't give a shit about gay marriage, and I couldnt care less what the resolution is. In fact, most of America is disenchanted with the topic. Much of what you say and point to is just empty air. You aren't voting for Bush because of his stances on gay marriage. He could have been excellent otherwise, and could have fixed everything in this economy that Clinton utterly clusterfucked (the savings rate still isnt back to under .99, but oh well, at least it isnt 1.024 anymore), and you'd still think he's some suckass bigot.

Whether or not Kerry releases his medical and war records, I really don't care. As far as I am concerned, the day he organized a march to throw away medals of honor received in battle, symbolically throwing someone else's medal to start the movement, while at the same time framing his own personal medals, I knew all I needed to about his character.

I find Bush to be a leader. Not a good leader, and not a bad leader, but a leader who will make decisions and stick by them, sometimes rather too stubbornly. I also believe Bush to be straightforward in his views. I find neither to be the case with Kerry. As for economic issues, Kerry came from the state with the highest state taxes, and ranked 43rd out of 50 in having the most uninsured children. So to say he has some economic plan of revival which will work is iffy at the very best. If he cannot get a state economy running, how he plans on running the nation is truly beyond me.

But going back to issues of leadership, I'll end it with this. I don't agree with everything that my boss says and demands. But I respect the fact that he not only makes the decision, but sticks by it, and defends his decisions. I'd rather have a boss that makes those decisions and sticks by them, even if I don't always agree with the results than have a boss who constantly changes specs, requirements, and puts projects on hold on a whim just to create a better image of himself at a given time. And just because I don't agree with what the boss says or does, it doesn't mean that I think he's a bad boss. He's thinking of a bigger picture than just me, and has to answer to authorities far higher than me.

[GSTamral]

The biggest dirt on each campaign.

6 things on Bush
1) He didn't serve out his time in the national guard, instead received special treatment due to his father's status in the CIA at the time.
2) He went into Iraq for reasons that were personal and not truly in line with the war on terrorism. After hearing of a plot to kill his father, he took a personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein and created an unnecessary war of it.
3) He is a pro-corporate, pro-rich candidate
4) He is not paying enough attention to Afghanistan, and the root of the terrorism.
5) He has been terrible for the economy
6) He's a bigot against gay marriage


6 things on John Kerry
1) He received 2 freebie "injuries" to award him the 2nd and 3rd purple hearts in Vietnam so he could come home.
2) His state ranked 43rd in providing health insurance for children, 39th in standardized test scores for graduating high school seniors, 1st in taxes, and is among the bottom in terms of air/sea quality, the latter of which is unusual because it is not one of the more heavily used ports.
3) He waffles on issues, changing his stances to meet the popularity of the moment.
4) He is a career politician that has no idea of what middle class life is because of the family fortune. He has one of the largest personal staffs of any Senator in the United States, yet his voting attendance record is only average.
5) His voting record has been inconsistent and very spotty.
6) He is a weak candidate that lacks the toughness to deal with the International Community.



My beliefs: I believe Bush is guilty of number 1, number 3 and number 6, and Kerry is guilty of number 2, 3, 4 and 5.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by GSTamral

You aren't voting for Bush because of his stances on gay marriage.

You know Tamral, simply put, you're a fool. I'm not voting for Bush for many reason and his stance on gay marriage is just one of them. In fact, I've listed them constantly for well over a year in many threads long before gay marriage was even an issue. here, I'll do you a favor and list them a few of them:

1) civil rights 2) human rights 3) environmental policy 4) foreign policy 5) economic policy 6) a lack of honesty 7) and most recently, he believes himself to be a messenger of God's will.

There you go. A whole bunch of reasons that millions and millions of people hate Bush. And most of them don't even approve of gay marriage themselves. Of course, you'll just pigeonhole them to make it easier to dismiss their criticisms.

And re: the whole propaganda machine thing? I don't give a shit, really. See, I was making a point. I countered a claim of "being blinded by hate and hypocrisy" with "being blinded by gullibility and the Republican propaganda machine" and got exactly the response I was looking for.

You're a good example of it too. You know the facts. You're a clear, logical thinker who has carefully weighed all the factors. Everyone else who disagrees with you are just "liberals blinded by the media." It's pretty obvious who's really the blind one.

But you know what? I'll agree with you on one thing. Bush sure is a leader. So was Custer. And now I'll let someone who cares continue this if anyone actually wants to bother. Gods know I don't.

Raven

[GSTamral]

<<<<
You're a good example of it too. You know the facts. You're a clear, logical thinker who has carefully weighed all the factors. Everyone else who disagrees with you are just "liberals blinded by the media." It's pretty obvious who's really the blind one.
>>>>

Except I've voted for democrats before, and on more than one occasion. You make a point to bash Bush at every opportunity, and have yet to ever point out a single thing either in his favor, or even an admission that something he has done at some point in time has been the actions of a logical person. You portray him to be some sort of anti-christ. You are at the far end of an extreme in terms of literal blind hatred, thus the stigma someone else decided to place upon you. \

<<
1) civil rights 2) human rights 3) environmental policy 4) foreign policy 5) economic policy 6) a lack of honesty 7) and most recently, he believes himself to be a messenger of God's will.
>>

1) John Kerry has a better record
2) John Kerry has a better record
3) Bush has a better record
4) John Kerry has not been in a position to make any decisions, and his signalling has been so mixed, it is impossible to say who would do a better job.
5) George Bush has a MUCH better record
6) When you can actually provide documented proof of a candidate lying beyong a reasonable doubt, I'll take a look, but considering the volume of he said/she said/he said/she said, it falls down to sheerly a matter of who you choose to believe, and given you posting history, this again serves an excellent illustration of why someone has chosen to stigmatize you with the label of "blinded by liberal hatred".
7) this again is a perfect example of "blind liberal hatred". Anyone can make up statements like this to try and fragmentize the nature of a candidates actions. By making this statement, you have not done or argued anything that a 12 year old influenced by his/her parents couldn't do.

[Lord Deprav]

Sorry I didn't read any of this post except the first several lines that said "yes this came from drudge." Matt is an idiot and I don't care what anyone says. He is nothing more then a common reporter who likes to say he is much more in depth and he gets local news that they wont let you hear. Not true at all. Many of his subjects are just bullshit. The ones that are true, he doesnt even explain half of them. What a cocksucking american journalist.

Deprav
His proudness in America only lacks that of media, but yet his country isn't at war with itself because of media. Strange, to say the least.

[TheEschaton]

and have yet to ever point out a single thing either in his favor,


I like(d) George W. Bush's stance on cloning. Before he WAFFLED ON HIS DECISION and sold out to the other side, and didn't outright ban cloning.

-TheE-

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by The Edine
notice how the Lib's are avoiding this thread?

Nice how you categorize anyone anti-Bush as liberal. Funny that.


Originally posted by Hulkein
Unless you're voting for Nader or whoever is running for the Libertarians, or a write in.. you're voting for Kerry.

It's more complex then that Skirmisher. Kerry is hiding this for reasons unknown. Bush served as an Air National Guard, he released his record. It doesn't really matter if his position wasn't tough enough for you or not, and here it's not really the point.

We know Kerry WENT to Vietnam, the question here is why won't he be open as to what happened. Also, why won't he let people peer into many aspects of his life.

You want to vote for someone with that much to hide, go ahead.

Little late, but he did release it.

My father received two purple hearts in Viet Nam. Once for taking three bullets and once for taking shrapnel due to his CO stomping though a mine field despite the advice of his company.

Dad also came back from the conflict and protested. I guess this makes him unpatriotic.

Here's the deal with that era. If you did not come from money or politics, you ass was drafted. Some voluntarily went, some went under protest. It was hell, it was atrocious, and it scarred so many.

Bush was protected. I don't care if Kerry received a purple heart for a scratch, he was there. Bush was protected and has yet to provide any proof that he even served state-side.

There isn't any concrete proof that Bush wasn't AWOL. He was a cheerleader with a C average at Yale who only got in because he was a legacy and his father was head of the CIA.

I'm sorry, if I was Bush, I wouldn't question anyone's credentials simply because my own are lacking.


Originally posted by Hulkein

<<And his sudden one eighty on the gay marriage issue>>

Which was spurred by the rogue actions of judges.

I find the comment about "rogue" judges humorous.

How does one become a rogue judge? Prove to me that these officials were doing anything but their jobs.

Just as being against Bush makes one a lib, or protesting Viet Nam makes one unpatriotic, calling into question of a legal stance and doing what you are required makes you a rogue? Typical.

The more I listen and read, the more I lean away from the libertarian ticket toward Kerry.

Kerry sucks, but not as hard as Bush.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by TheEschaton

I like(d) George W. Bush's stance on cloning. Before he WAFFLED ON HIS DECISION and sold out to the other side, and didn't outright ban cloning.

-TheE-

Dubya's stance on cloning was taken from very very poor and biased information given to him from his advisory council. I doubt he even understood what his advisors were saying.

Taking a stance against stem-cell research by lumping it in with abortion was and still is just asinine and ill educated.

May as well out-law a woman's menstrual cycle and male masturbation.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

I find the comment about "rogue" judges humorous.

That's bandied about so often. Though usually it's 'activist' judges. And they're usually bowing to the 'homosexual agenda'. What isn't mentioned is:

Of the US Supreme Court Justices who voted in favor of striking down the sodomy laws in Lawrence vs Texas, the majority were appointed by Republicans.

Of the Massachussetts Supreme Court Justices who voted that the ban against same-sex marriages was unconstitutional, the majority were appointed by...? You guessed it. Republicans.

It seems they were considered excellent judges up to that point to be appointed by the very people who are now condemning them. Ironic. And dishonest.

Raven

Raven, republican does not mean conservitive, especialy in a state like Mass.
If you are not making up in the first place.

And you see Tsa'ah You prove Tamral true, George H W bush became the CIA Director in the last months of 75, George W. Bush Graduated from Yale in well, 1977 or 78.
So you see His dad being director of the CIA had nothing to do with George Bush going to Yale. Perhaps his father being in congress might have played a role, though I believe schools like Yale and Harvard are above that, as I have stated before. But it still comes down to the fact that being the CIA director after 1974 means that it was not influential in him going to Yale. So in fact you are wrong.



[Edited on 4-22-2004 by The Edine]

[longshot]

Originally posted by The Edine

And you see Tsa'ah You prove Tamral true, George H W bush became the CIA Director in the last months of 75, George W. Bush Graduated from Yale in well, 1977 or 78.
So you see His dad being director of the CIA had nothing to do with George Bush going to Yale. Perhaps his father being in congress might have played a role, though I believe schools like Yale and Harvard are above that, as I have stated before. But it still comes down to the fact that being the CIA director after 1974 means that it was not influential in him going to Yale. So in fact you are wrong.



[Edited on 4-22-2004 by The Edine]

Are you trying to say that the younger Bush got into Yale on merit? If so, that's fucking hilarious.

I think affirmative action blows too, but when the legacy system lets someone as average as this guy get into Yale, it's tough to complain.





Originally posted by GSTamral
The Dems have had a larger propaganda machine running for ages.

Historically, the Democratic Party has been a much much greater machine of propaganda than the Republican party.

Democrats also have a far more fanatical following than the Republican party. Blacks, Gays, and Environmentalists are three of the most solid voting blocs around, and they never change their views. The only historically democratic stronghold that is switching sides, albeit slowly, are hispanics.

The strongest bloc for Republicans historically were the elderly, catholics, and devout protestants. Two of those groups are now virtually split down the middle. Only protestants are pro-Bush at this point in time.

From a class perspective in earnings, the lower class is almost entirely democrat, the lower middle class is relatively split, with a slight edge to republicans, the middle class is almost deadlocked, the upper middle class is 2 to 1 in favor of republicans, and the upper class is 3 to 2 in favor of democrats. In total in the nation there are slightly more registered democrats than republicans.

But if you want to talk about a propaganda machine, the media is well known as a general trend to be liberal. How much media attention was given to the Whitewater scandal? How much media attention was placed on Somalia? Yet every book, nook, and cranny that comes out that is anti-republican makes the headlines of the national news. That is precisely why I choose to get my news from either the investors business daily, or reuters, because those are the only places to get news.


I think there's no real way to identify who has the bigger "machine", but at least right now, issues for republicans are not nearly as divisive as democratic issues.

I can't think of a single issue that would cause a rift in the party.

On the other hand, you have gay marraige to deal with for democrats. How do you handle this without offending lots of people?

You have a half baked and half finished war (in two countries!) that people are against, but how do you best oppose combat and not fuck people over and still not look like a pussy?

You have issues of health care. Republican supporters really could give two shits... they are the ones with insurance in most cases.

There's many more. You get the idea. The republican support is really solid. The democrats have a lot more stuff to deal with.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by The Edine
Raven, republican does not mean conservitive, especialy in a state like Mass.
If you are not making up in the first place.

And you see Tsa'ah You prove Tamral true, George H W bush became the CIA Director in the last months of 75, George W. Bush Graduated from Yale in well, 1977 or 78.
So you see His dad being director of the CIA had nothing to do with George Bush going to Yale. Perhaps his father being in congress might have played a role, though I believe schools like Yale and Harvard are above that, as I have stated before. But it still comes down to the fact that being the CIA director after 1974 means that it was not influential in him going to Yale. So in fact you are wrong.


Bush Sr became the director of the CIA in 76. Bush Jr graduated Yale in 68 a cheerleader with a C average. I'll concede that point.

You're a fool to believe that Dubya, the son of a Texas Congressman and a potential legacy to Yale was admitted on his own merit. I don’t care what you believe of the Ivy League; you're a fool to think Jr had the clout to get in on his own.

Unless you think a SAT score of 1206 was up to the 64 admissions requirement of Yale.

Here's a hint, sub 1400 was pretty much an auto no at the time. Unless there was cash or clout.

I proved Tamral nothing, shall we play again?

[err ... changed 75 to 76 to correspond with Ford's appointment.]

[Edited on 4-22-2004 by Tsa`ah]

The whole point of tamral's post was that people, both sides fall into propaganda, what you said was just that.

[Tsa`ah]

How so?

What "propaganda" did I post?

Was Dubya not a C average cheerleading legacy from Yale?

Was he not at that time a son of a Texas congressman?

Was his SAT not below Yale's standards of that period?

Has he proved he wasn't AWOL?

Was he not protected from the conflict?

Did Kerry serve as a combatant in Viet Nam?

Where is the propaganda?

Prove me wrong.

that his father being director of the CIA got him into yale, only when it was pointed out that Bush Sr. was not directer of the CIA at that time did you retract that. In your first post it was fairly obvious you believed that to be true, or you were telling a lie, which i dont believe was the case.

look its pointless to debate this, you have your views, and were shown that you were wrong. If you question bush having not been AWOL, scroll back and read over this thread again, I have presented the needed evidence.

[Tsa`ah]

OOooo... Harsh word lie is.

So I guess you were telling a lie about the whole UN enforced no fly zone.

I guess every other time you were incorrect, you were indeed telling a lie.

By your own definition Edine, you are a big fat liar.

My point is he got into Yale because of family influence; not because he was Yale material.

My point is that he did not go to Viet Nam because of his family influence.

My point is that he should not be trying to play a trump card that he does not have.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by The Edine
look its pointless to debate this, you have your views, and were shown that you were wrong. If you question bush having not been AWOL, scroll back and read over this thread again, I have presented the needed evidence.

You have produced nothing but accounts of hearsay.

Learn to differentiate between fact and hearsay.

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
OOooo... Harsh word lie is.

So I guess you were telling a lie about the whole UN enforced no fly zone.

I guess every other time you were incorrect, you were indeed telling a lie.

By your own definition Edine, you are a big fat liar.

You did not read my post did you?


In your first post it was fairly obvious you believed that to be true, or you were telling a lie, which i dont believe was the case.

[Tsa`ah]

It was suggested, even if you half-heartedly dismissed it.

You have yet to address the questions presented, let alone disprove them.

Classic deflection of the defeated.

this entire thread has addressed the issue Tsa'ah, as I said it is pointless to continue to argue. I suggest you go back and read the thread, im not much for having to repeat myself 10 times.

[Warriorbird]

Not that Edine would ever admit he was wrong about anything.

[Tsa`ah]

But you haven't said a thing Edine. Nothing.

You have simply posted links that prove nothing.

You have not put anything in your own words using your own thoughts.

You have ducked and deflected every point that has been brought up.

If you simply wish to "accept" that we disagree, that's perfectly fine. Just don't duck out believing you have debated or proven anything other than your own inability to do so.

[Skirmisher]

Edine, come on, I used the very same link you gave me to supposedly prove he was not awol to show more evidence that he in fact was awol.

I did not even have to go and search for a different article/link.

All that was needed was in yours.

Simply becasue you say something loudly and then even more loudly does not make it true. What you called "evidence" is simply laughable. If I or any other "liberal" tried to use such evidence in any debate you would howl.

Think with your head for a moment and not your heart and you will have to agree there is just no way to justify your position on this point.

At the very LEAST you have to stop asserting that he proved the allegations wrong.

Skrim the only proof that is needed in relation to Bush being AWOL is the fact that there were no charges pressed against him by the military.

and no skrim you said that the Lt. Col. had no pictures, which does not mean anything aside from the fact that well, he does not have any pictures.

[Skirmisher]

Dearest Davie,

if you want to believe that go right on.

Of course by that reasoning you will not question anything more about Kerry's record as the military isn't.

Thanks champ!:socool:

you then miss the whole reason for this thread. People [you] gave bush a hard time, turn about is fair play.

[Skirmisher]

Oh Davie, my god what a lemming you are to find this to be the best course of action to attempt to retaliate with.

Just use your head for goodness sakes.

WHY would you want to return to a subject where Bush has come out on the bottom time after time after time?

No matter what you find out about Kerry in this regard i find it incredibly unlikely it will reduce the damage the bush campaign is doing to themselves just by bringing it up again and again.

You may wish to search in their staff for a mole because you are doing the Democrats work for them.

[Warriorbird]

He has difficulty having an original thought.

[Tsa`ah]

Again you deflect.

The thread matured as evidence of Kerry's service was provided. Evidence of Bush's going AWOL and desertion, or lack of participation, is far more damaging.

You answered squat Edine, and continue to answer Squat. To top off squat you post crap.

Why wasn't he charge? The same reason he made it into Yale. Big Daddy.

Look ... Big Daddy Bush, incidentally campaigned against civil rights, not only looked after him in college, but also continued to pamper Jr as a UN ambassador and then as the chairmen for the Republican National Committee.

You don't charge the son of a good ol' boy with desertion, not if you are a career coreman.

I'm sorry you don't see the favoritism; those in the real world know how to connect the dots.

The proof is there. Were Dubya's career in the guard an honorable one he would produce a DD-214 or NGB 22, but he hasn't. Why? I don't believe those exist.

In 72 he was campaigning for Winton Blount and was still required to report for drills. Guess what, General William Turnipseed says he never saw him report. No record exists of him reporting.

Care to go on?

Ellington AFB, Texas. May 1, 1972 to April 30, 1973. His own frickin COs would not complete his evaluation because in their own words, 'Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of this report."

The only reason he wasn't charged at that point, other than being Big Daddy's lil boy, was that the personnel officer decided he finished his service in AL. Even though Dubya had already moved and established residency in Texas during that time frame.

May 72 to May 73, unaccounted for.

Had he served he would be able to produce his discharge papers or severance papers. He hasn't.

It has been reported that all of Dubya's military records are sealed in Big Daddy's presidential library.

Care to counter any of these?

Why is it that nearly every man who served in the armed forces can produce or request a copy of a DD-214 or NGB 22, yet Dubya can't?

[longshot]

Edine, you need some chapstick so you can lube up?

This repeated raping has to have you chaffing up pretty quickly...

but as I said, tsa'ah no charges were filed.
and after bush let all the documents out the media shut up about it. I am only left to wonder why.
And what did I come up with skrim, I did not start this thread.

and where do you get your informaion from tsa'ah?

[Tsa`ah]

Frickin google some damn words Edine. It's all over.

CNN, CNBC, FOX, even the fucking Wall Street Journal!

Bush released nothing to indicate he was in service at the specified time! NADDA! NOTHING! ZILCH! FUCKING ZERO!

Geeze man, read.

He can't prove he was present for duty for a whole year!
He can't prove he was discharged honorably!

What he can provide are dental records. Whoop!

Key words to search for. George Bush military records.

If those don't fit your requirement, try desertion and AWOL.

Yes, we have a deserter in the highest-ranking office this nation seats.

[Edited to add ... ]

And we've pointed out again and again why no charges were ever filed. CAREER FUCKING LONGETIVITY and BIG FUCKING DADDY!

It's not the first time the privileged "got in and away" and it won't be the last.


[Edited on 4-22-2004 by Tsa`ah]

Oh and Tsa'ah another little date for you.
Bush by your own words graduated from Yale in 68.
George H.W. Bush did not become a congressman untill 1966
unless George W. Bush was able to get through yale in under two years time I dont see how His father being a congressman had anything to do with him being accepted to yale either.:bouncy:

[Wezas]

Originally posted by The Edine
and where do you get your informaion from tsa'ah?

I posted this link on Page 4 of this thread. The source may be bias, but the faxed copies of military documents cannot lie. A dozen or so links within the story are to scanned copies of reviews and letters about Bush's military career.

http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/3671

[Tsa`ah]

And your point Edine?

That GWB wasn't a child of privilege? That he wasn't a legacy? That his Father or Grandfather had no pull?

Explain how he got in with a 1200 SAT?

The fact that GB Sr already had political attempts, was decorated, and him along with Big Daddy Sr already had more money than god had nothing to do with it.

You pull the lamest of tid-bits up. I'll let you run with it, so long as you answer one of my questions. Primarily the one I have already asked in this response.

How did Dubya get into Yale with a 1200 SAT?

My point is I am able to point out factual inconsistencies in your statements Tsa'ah.
It is not a big deal really.



[Edited on 4-22-2004 by The Edine]

[Tsa`ah]

You've pointed out over looked inaccuracies.

I've pointed out BS.

Dubya's SAT?

How about his whole fucking transcript?

Note the SAT scorings are in the upper right.


[Edited on 4-22-2004 by Tsa`ah]

[Skirmisher]

Nah, a better question is who he payed to take his SAT's.

For many people 1200 isn't all that impressive.

For Senor Simple?:smilegrin:

[Tsa`ah]

Damn ... Tell me I don't smell toast.

Tell me, tell me now.

I stand corrected on his SAT scores.
:smile:

[Wezas]

Jesus, I feel like a moron because I only got 1080.

Next thing you know I'll be doing coke, bankrupting companies and choking on pretzels (Muhahaha, Just for you, Edine!)

[Edaarin]

To be fair, SATs were a lot harder in the 60s than they are now (I think you can miss like 3 questions and still get 1600 when I took them). So meh, maybe he had a lot of extracurrics or something.

However, if you don't think legacy was important (more so back then than even now), then you're delusional.

<= couldn't get into Yale with an aggregate 1560, from taking it twice.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by The Edine
I stand corrected on his SAT scores.
:smile:

Nice edit of your post asking me to prove it.

Thanks Wezas!:heart:

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

Originally posted by The Edine
I stand corrected on his SAT scores.
:smile:

Nice edit of your post asking me to prove it.

It was edited prior to your responce, had a second thought about posting it and you saw it before it was removed.

[TheEschaton]

Perhaps his father being in congress might have played a role, though I believe schools like Yale and Harvard are above that, as I have stated before.


Yale and Harvard are CERTAINLY not above such a thing. Especially when the father is a Congressman who donates money. It looks good if you can say, "The son of Congressmen go to this school."

In fact, Yale and Harvard are notorious for lousy students who got in on legacies. Trust me on this one, Edine. ;)

-TheE-

[TheEschaton]

Explain how he got in with a 1200 SAT?

Maybe he had really good extra-curriculars. Who knows, he might of been head of the Speech and Debate club.

/sarcasm

-TheE-

[TheEschaton]

I find it humorous, on his transcript, that two of his lowest grades are political science, and political science lab (73 and 71, respectively). Apparently, the third time he took it, he took it pass/fail, and passed.


-TheE-

[Tendarian]

So did he earn those C's or were those cause of his daddy too? Im curious how deep you think this goes.

[DeV]

Originally posted by TheEschaton
I find it humorous, on his transcript, that two of his lowest grades are political science, and political science lab (73 and 71, respectively). Apparently, the third time he took it, he took it pass/fail, and passed.


-TheE- He should have majored in Philosophy.

[Latrinsorm]

Bush kicked my ass on the Spanish Sat. :( But I pwned him in math. Hurray!

Tsa'ah tell me where did you find the transcript, what was the website?

[DeV]

Hell did this man get an A average in any of his college courses?

[Tendarian]

Would it make you feel better if he went to a podunk college and got straight A's?

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tendarian
Would it make you feel better if he went to a podunk college and got straight A's? Yes.

I knew a kid in high school, all he wanted to do was go to Harvard (which isn't Yale, obviously, but go with it) and he was hella qualified. He was captain of the sailing team (I know, but he was the CAPTAIN), he had a 4.0+, his SAT's were plenty good enough. Didn't make it. And if he didn't make it because someone like Bush $$-ed their way in, I would be horrendously displeased.

Obviously, Bush's grades are irrelevant, as is school.

[TheEschaton]

I know a kid in high school who applied to UPenn (Ivy League), valedictorian at a private Jesuit high school, national finalist in speech and debate, the mock trial team (which he captained) went to the nationals 2 years in a row, and his SATs were around the 1300 mark. His GPA was something ridiculous, like 98.7. He got like, an A- freshman year.

Didn't get in.

And yet, somehow, I got in. My grades were lower, I had less extra-curriculars, my SATs were higher, granted. But you know what I had? A father who graduated from Wharton (the business school at UPenn) and who gives them money every year.

Needless to say, I didn't go to UPenn after I heard that story.

-TheE-

[Tendarian]

I agree that would be annoying as hell but thats life. What high school did you go to where sailing was an option for after school sports?


I was watching some show a month or two ago and they were talking about advantages growing up rich and how unfair they were. They even had Dr Phil on as he employs his son on his show. The guy holds a microphone so people can ask Dr Phil questions! They were asking Dr Phil things like "Dont you think its unfair that you hired your son instead of someone else? He was like uhhh no. Sheesh I personally dont care. I think the people who want everyone to start off on the exact same playing field whether your dad is Bill Gates or a crackhead are insane. In a utopia that might be possible,in the real world? Sorry. Whats the point of busting your ass to get ahead if you cant give your kids advantages? Just so no one thinks im some lucky sob my dad was a cop,i think before he retired he made 40k/year(after 20+ years on the job) and my mom a secretary at a state college.

[Edaarin]

Heh, you have any idea how hard it is to get an A in a college class...unless you go to a school with grade inflation, or you take a gut class like VCR Repair 101.

Coming from a high school where 25% of our graduating class went to Ivy Leages (not 25% got in, 25% went), I can say that there are some shmucks who got in more because they were of a certain ethnicity or had a legacy than because they were more qualified.

Well Tsa'ah when you get back be sure to tell me where the website is that you got the transcript from

[Valthissa]

[quote]Originally posted by Edaarin
Heh, you have any idea how hard it is to get an A in a college class...unless you go to a school with grade inflation, or you take a gut class like VCR Repair 101.

I'll look for a link to an article I read a few years ago. The data on Ivy league schools showed an increase in the numbers of A's by a factor of 5 (yes 5) over the twentieth century.

C/Valth

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tendarian
I agree that would be annoying as hell but thats life. What high school did you go to where sailing was an option for after school sports?Jesuits. They're so crazy. :D
Whats the point of busting your ass to get ahead if you cant give your kids advantages?What's the point of busting your ass to get ahead if other people give their kids advantages?
Originally posted by Edaarin
Heh, you have any idea how hard it is to get an A in a college classNot hard at all. Work = get an A. That's the way it should be. (Of course, there are some dicks out there who, as a practical joke, call themselves teachers, but I disregard them because they suck.)

[Tendarian]

What's the point of busting your ass to get ahead if other people give their kids advantages?

Cause in the end you will still be ahead? If you start a monopoly game and give one person a $5000 head start you can still win. It will just take a while. And even if you dont beat that one guy,this is real life,you dont have to lose just cause the other guy won.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tendarian
Cause in the end you will still be ahead?Depends on how much of an advantage they have.
you dont have to lose just cause the other guy won.Actually, that's pretty much exactly how it works. The other guy's dad moneybags his way into Williams (or something) and because of that I have to go to UConn. Then he gets a better job that (coincidentally) we were the only contestants for. If he didn't have the bankroll, I would have gone to a better college and gotten a better job. I'd chalk that up in the L column.

[Tendarian]

Then you will never be ahead as there will always be someone with a better job than you even with the same qualifications. To me as long as i have a job that i at least somewhat enjoy and have enough to pay the bills then i win. I guess its all about how you look at things.

Btw do you think your scenario happens very often? Some guy you compete with gets in over you cause his daddy is rich and then after you both graduate you apply to the same company and are the only two there applying and he wins cause of his education is better? Do you think companies only look at education? Look at the apprentice,the guy who went to the ivy league school lost cause the other guy was just better. If you are truly better (maybe im naive) they would have hired you.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tendarian
Btw do you think your scenario happens very often? At least 18 times a day, by my reckoning. :whistle:

I don't like people doing better than others if they haven't earned it. Thus, I dislike the American school system and most workplace environments I've been in.

[TheEschaton]

Heh, you have any idea how hard it is to get an A in a college class...unless you go to a school with grade inflation, or you take a gut class like VCR Repair 101.

I got B's and A's all throughout college, and I'll tell you right now, all I did was play Gemstone through college. Graduated with a 3.4 something. Didn't deserve anywhere NEAR a B+ average (which is what a 3.4 is).

Edited to add: and my Jesuit high school had crew. We won the nationals twice, and sent two of our rowers to Yale on full scholarships. Ivy Leagues like stupid gay shit like crew and sailing.

-TheE-

[Edited on 4-22-2004 by TheEschaton]

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by The Edine
Well Tsa'ah when you get back be sure to tell me where the website is that you got the transcript from

Ok dumbass, let me explain this to you.

You got your ass handed to you.

You saw a straw and decided to grab it. Your straw was crap, so at that point you wanted to pretend you never went for it.

I've already heard about your request/demand to have the JPEG of the transcript removed. I believe you are sighting copyright notices on another web-space.

Bitch please. Use fucking google/yahoo/looksmart/lycos/hotbot/metasearch ... whatever.

Put in George Bush college transcript Yale as the search string, hit enter, close your eyes and point.

That's what site I got it from bitch.

It's all over. In fact I viewed no less than 30 consecutive pages, 5 of them with side by side comparisons of transcripts from that era, and you were the one dumb enough to ask me about his fucking SAT score.

Good thing you didn't ask me to prove he was a C student no?

Listen, answer my question with factual information or shut the fuck up.

The transcript isn't moving unless Yale calls up and says "WTF bitches", or one of the admins decides to delete it.

Until that time, go read some more from you mailing group or cruise your political sites for your daily thought pattern and get the fuck out of my face.

[Edaarin]

Don't blow a gasket gramps.

Heh, damn.

[Skirmisher]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Ok dumbass, let me explain this to you.

I've already heard about your request/demand to have the JPEG of the transcript removed. I believe you are sighting copyright notices on another web-space.

The transcript isn't moving unless Yale calls up and says "WTF bitches", or one of the admins decides to delete it.

Ouch.
:scared:

No i only saw it on the one sight, and it was the first to come up after googled. I do note that you didnt say where you got it from, So I will assume it was the first site that came up. Which was www.georgewbush.org (which is the first site that comes up when you google)
If i was attempting to "remove" it and as maliciously as you assume I would have droped a note to the website. CT was kind enough to show me a few other sites it was at. So it was a non issue.

I dont debate that the transcript is correct now. I will honestly say that I never paid attention to his college transcripts and\or his grades.

The question about what site you got it from was in relation to georgewbush.org again is the first one that comes up with the info, which well go look at it for yourself I dont thin I need to describe it. So you will see why i was layed the question in front of you.

Edit: ask CT I was not in any way trying to cause a problem.

[Edited on 4-23-2004 by The Edine]

[GSTamral]

Bill Gates was a college dropout.

John Kerry came back from Vietnam vilifying his fellow troops, accusing them of being rapists, child-killers, random civilian killers, and many other things, statements he now regrets and plays down at every opportunity.

Larry Ellison never had a straight A average in college.

Al Gore graduated with a 2.2 from the University of Tennessee, a far shittier school than Yale.

needless to say, how they performed in college says next to nothing about them. I graduated Duke in Biomedical Engineering with a 3.92, and carried a 4.0 average in the Rutgers Industrial Engineering program, and further carried a 4.0 until my final semester for my MBA in Finance, the latter 2 of which while still working a full time job. Does this make me qualified to be the next president? Should America start voting based on college grades from 25 years in the past?

I just don't see where the argument of GWB's grades has anything to do with the current presidential election. And I hate to break the news to some people, but one does not get elected president by being an idiot. You have to have a solid understanding of people, politics, and a street smarts sense in order to work your way up the chain. If you think it is nothing more than a "propaganda machine" putting an idiot into office, well then, go ahead and Vote for Kerry, or Nader.

But I'll throw an open challenge to anyone who plans on coming to Simucon just to prove a point. Trivial Pursuit, IQ test, MENSA test, Math Test, English test, pick your standardized poison, whatever you want. I'll put down 20 bucks against your 1, kick your ass 3 ways from Sunday and make all kinds of laughing sounds and say you're stupid, having only won a tip for a single drink. Yet oddly enough, in doing so, I will have proven NOTHING about your abilities as a leader or in measuring whether or not you have any street smarts.

[Edited on 4-23-2004 by GSTamral]

[Latrinsorm]

I could make like 80 bucks at Simucon. Too bad it costs more to get there, or I'm sure I could convince Dad to spot me a plane ticket. :(

I think the point of the transcript was Bush was not of the intellectual caliber to attend Yale, not that he got a C thus he is not Presidential caliber. At least that was the point I saw.

[Artha]

Trivial Pursuit, IQ test, MENSA test, Math Test, English test, pick your standardized poison, whatever you want. I'll put down 20 bucks against your 1, kick your ass 3 ways from Sunday and make all kinds of laughing sounds and say you're stupid, having only won a tip for a single drink

I'm bringing $5, just for when you're really, really drunk.

[GSTamral]

Again, Latrinstorm, any man who is savvy enough to get into the office of the president does not merit such a question. Book smarts arent the only thing in this world, and who you know is a big part of not only the admission process, but also of how far you can get, and how quickly you get there.

As to your claim you could take 80 bucks off of me on those tests, you are more than welcome to try. That's why I passed out the challenge.

[GSTamral]

<<<
I'm bringing $5, just for when you're really, really drunk.
>>>

May I suggest the math test then. Hard to work out numbers when you can't think.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by GSTamral
As to your claim you could take 80 bucks off of me on those tests, you are more than welcome to try. That's why I passed out the challenge. I've got a couple 800's, so I know I'd at least get a draw. Maybe in a few years, when I have a car (and a license and a little more time on my hands).

[Jack]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
How so?

What "propaganda" did I post?

Was Dubya not a C average cheerleading legacy from Yale?

Was he not at that time a son of a Texas congressman?

Was his SAT not below Yale's standards of that period?

Has he proved he wasn't AWOL?

Was he not protected from the conflict?

Did Kerry serve as a combatant in Viet Nam?

Where is the propaganda?

Prove me wrong.

Yeah, I know I'm coming into this late, I've been trying to avoid political discussions, since they generally turn into insult matches. There's one thing that I think needs to be clarified though. The accusation of George W Bush being AWOL, or worse, deserting. The reason people tend to belive this is true is due to a lack of understanding Military service requirements as a member of the National Guard. I'll give an example here, which should clear things right up. Having seperated from the Marine Corps, and finding myself overly bored, I recently signed up for the Texas National Guard, and have some understanding of how things work.

Let's say I'm going to be out of town on my drill weekend for June, July, and even August. If I don't show up for those drills, I am not AWOL. I simply need to inform my CO that I will be out of town, and won't make it on those drill weekends. In order to make up for that, let's say in September, I'll need to attend three extra drills. That completes my obligation, and even though failed to report for three months, I was never AWOL, I never deserted.

Further, nothing in George W. Bush's records indicates he was ever charged with AWOL, or Desertion, let alone convicted. Further, he was given an Honorable discharge, so any drills he missed, he made up at a later date, thus fulfilling his obligation. Hope that helps folks understand a little better.

-Jack

[longshot]

Originally posted by The Edine


The question about what site you got it from was in relation to georgewbush.org again is the first one that comes up with the info, which well go look at it for yourself I dont thin I need to describe it. So you will see why i was layed the question in front of you.

Edit: ask CT I was not in any way trying to cause a problem.

[Edited on 4-23-2004 by The Edine]

Edine, the transcript is an historical record. He could have posted it from numerous sites.

His google search turned up an anti-bush site first... this does not make it, or any other historical documents less relevant.

This transcript... this is what would be called a "fact".

By the way, how fucking dumb are you that you can't google something?

Do you break out in hives everytime you go to a site that says not nice things about our president?

Does your Dad/Uncle/Mom/Sister beat you if they find such sites in the internet history?

I'm just trying to figure out your reason for avoiding typing in three fucking words and hitting search.

Maybe if you could do this yourself, you could limit the number of bullshit posts you make. We can do without the ones that say,

"Wer did yuu get taht from, Tza"aavh?".

Even now, after the tremendous beating you've taken, you still critisize the site that he chose to post it from. It's a fucking transcript.

You lack basic comprehension skills needed for debate.

[Wezas]

To throw a little humor in this thread, just stumbled onto a video that claims to contain the reason why we went into the Iraq war.

http://drunkstunts.com/media/media/bush_my_dad.mpeg

This is humor, and I'm not even sure if this was put together or if it's an actual video.

[TheEschaton]

I think it's a real video, I remember it from some speech he was making, but I think he was trying to make a joke at the time.

-TheE-

[DeV]

Originally posted by longshot

Everything longshot said. :lol2: