Kerry and Bush supporters. A question for y'all.

[peachgirl]

I'm more shocked at the idea put forth by some on this thread that bsnyder doesn't have the right to express her opinions of Max Cleland's actions than by her comments.

Show me where someone said she didn't have the right to say what she did.

Of course she had the right. We all have the right to be as vile and disgusting as we want to be.

 

[AirForceRocks]

Oops, double post!

 

[AirForceRocks]

Show me where someone said she didn't have the right to say what she did.

What do you consider the following?
(bolding added by me)

Let me tell you something lady...Max Cleeland gave more to this country than you or I ever thought about, and you simply aren't worthy of criticizing him.

So what does one have to do in this country to be considered worthy of criticizing Mr. Cleland, or anyone else for that matter?

We all have the right to be as vile and disgusting as we want to be.

Hmmm...so now it's "vile and disgusting" to criticize someone for using their war injuries for political purposes?

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by Rokkitsci
AGAIN - it is not that Kerry is not QUALIFIED to have gotten a Purple Heart. That is not the question.
The question is what did he DO with those Purple Hearts?
FIRST - he used the fact that he had THREE of them to leave VN after only four months. That is his decision - he is entitled to do it. But many soldiers could run to get a purple heart award if they got one for every scratch.

And some well-connected individuals ran for the safety of the ANG (after jumping ahead of a few hundred names), while others applied and received deferments (Cheney received 5 and Ashcroft received 7),

Originally posted by Rokkitsci
SECOND - when he got back, he established his CAREER based on being a "three time purple heart winner." He even had a personalized license plate made with 3PRPLHRT. This shows that he is obsessed with the fact that he HAS three purple hearts.

He did receive 3 PH's and was entitled to the license plate. I see them all the time here in my little corner of SW Florida. Maybe when I visit my local supermarket and see one of those PH license plates, I'll ask the license plate owner if he deserved the PH or was his wound self-inflicted.

If you see one of those PH license plates, you should do the same.

Originally posted by Rokkitsci
THIRD - he allows (or did allow) his campaign to portray him as some sort of walking miracle - having been "bloodied by hostile fire" on three different occasions, when in fact his 'injuries' were bandaid variety that school children endure every day.

My daughter has had more than her share of playground injuries, but none of them involved grenades or shrapnel.

Originally posted by Rokkitsci
FINALLY - to me it just shows the banality of the man. He tries to be something that he isn't. He wants so desperately to be a hero - he just isn't. He wants desperately to be thought of as a "shot up" wounded veteran - he just isn't.

Actually, Kerry is a combat veteran and he was wounded in combat.

If you feel this is inaccurate, take it up with the Navy.

Originally posted by Rokkitsci
It is Kerry who brings dishonor on himself by USING these events to represent something that they are not - this is what the Swift Boat Vets for Truth are exposing.

The Swift Boat Vets for unTruth are being exposed for the political smear group they are. Not all of the Swift Boat Vets, but certainly the leadership of the group is being exposed. Any more Bush campaign operatives resigning over their involvement with the Swift Boat Vets?

Originally posted by Rokkitsci
IF IF IF - Kerry had just allowed his Vietnam service to be a past entry in his resume - then it would be totally inappropriate to bring any of this up. BUT - Kerry did not do that. He EXAGGERATED his service - he portrayed himself as something that he was NOT. That is what is being challanged. Not his service - not even the fact that he didn't "deserve" the purple hearts. People are just attacking the FALSE image that Kerry has constructed about what they REPRESENT.

It is now undeniable:
- Kerry will LIE to enhance his image.
- Kerry will LIE to bolster a political point.
- Kerry will LIE about thow who oppose him.

But he is not bush - so that is all ok - right????

Welcome the the 2004 version of "Who Murdered Vince Foster".

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by goofygirl
Staying on the original topic: I wouldn't elect Dubya Bush for Dogcatcher. That's how I am voting (against Bush) , no matter what the ads say.


A Democrat's alphabet:

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVXYZ

No W!

Consider this: I'm going to be voting against Bush for the 4th time this November. I think this one will be the charm. What do you think?

 

[Elwood Blues]

Welcome back Brenda!!!!!

 

[minniepumpernickel]

Just jumping in to say glad to see that TheAnswr survived the hurricane!


...........eek jumping back out now!

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by bsnyder
Do you not understand that THIS is spin? And that most veterans aren't going to buy it.? And that the Kerry campaign knows (from their own internal polling) that most veterans aren't going to buy it?,

This is why the Kerry campaign has taken great pains to obscure this part of Kerry's Vietnam service record.

Actually, if the converstion around the local American Legion Post bar is any indication, many veterans are looking into the allegations and are finding out the truth for themselves and not quite what is portrayed by the Republicans, Swift Boat vets, or the right wing talking heads.

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by bsnyder
Because leaving out the first part of the sentence is immaterial to the political context and the intent of his words at the time he gave that speech.

Yup, the argument really starts to fall apart when you insert the "first part of the sentence". Most inconvenient.

Solution............pretend it doesn't exist or say it doesn't matter.

And hope no one goes back to check the record for themselves.

 

[Abracadabra]

I doubt in this controversy that either side has a stranglehold on the truth. 35 years is a long time to hold a memory or a grudge and memories have a tendency to fade and morph over time.

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by Lebjwb
So I guess lying is material and the truth is immaterial. That type of rational would make you the perfect Bush dupe and is the foundation of the Bush administration and campaign. They've been doing it since day one with the Fla election grab, WMD's, Rice, Viet Nam, National Guard Service, Iraq, 9/11, etc, etc, etc.

Thankfully we will only have a few more weeks until we finally put a leader in the White House. You see we are better organized and way more ticked off then the opposition ( just watch NYC next week during the convention for a preview of things to come)

History will bear this out: Bush has been a complete and utter failure, a disgrace to my beloved country and has betrayed the very troops he was sworn to protect by putting them in harms way for his own personal agenda.

Did I write this?

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by ThAnswr
Consider this: I'm going to be voting against Bush for the 4th time this November. I think this one will be the charm. What do you think?

I don't think it will, but you won't have to worry about it again unless they add another amendment.

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by bsnyder
Then why don't we have John Kerry clear up this little misunderstand by telling us that he thinks the Winter Soldiers investigation claims were fraudulent?

Cleland has become the ultimate Democrat--a professional victim, defined entirely by his triple-amputee status, who will do anything for the party hacks. Cleland served a term in the U.S. Senate; he apparently believed that his victim status entitled him to a Senate seat in perpetuity and without opposition, regardless of his votes, which consistently betrayed the views and interests of his constituents. As I say, the ultimate Democrat.

Oy gevalt!

Welcome to the new Republican party.

The Bushies keep harping on "whatever happened to the Democratic party"?

Well, what's happened to the Republican party of Ronald Reagan? Because this Republican party ain't that Republican party.

 

[Abracadabra]

Originally posted by ThAnswr
Well, what's happened to the Republican party of Ronald Reagan? Because this Republican party ain't that Republican party.

Sad, but true. President Reagan was able to disagree on political issues, but maintain a positive relationship even with those with whom he disagreed the most. It seems that both sides have lost this ability to maintain even minimally cordial relationships outside the political arena. That's a great loss to everyone because we all suffer the consequences.

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by AirForceRocks
What do you consider the following?
(bolding added by me)

So what does one have to do in this country to be considered worthy of criticizing Mr. Cleland, or anyone else for that matter?

Hmmm...so now it's "vile and disgusting" to criticize someone for using their war injuries for political purposes?

Criticize away.

That's the beauty of free speech. Just don't whine when someone excercises their right of free speech by calling your (or anyone else's) exercise of free speech "vile and disgusting" and further exercises their right of free speech by saying you (generic) aren't worthy to criticize.

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by minniepumpernickel
Just jumping in to say glad to see that TheAnswr survived the hurricane!


...........eek jumping back out now!

Thank you. Hurricane Charley re-arranged our landscape, our roof, our garage door, our interior decorating, and my daughter's school schedule.

Other than that, we're back to normal.

Truthfully, we're lucky to be alive.

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by Abracadabra
Sad, but true. President Reagan was able to disagree on political issues, but maintain a positive relationship even with those with whom he disagreed the most. It seems that both sides have lost this ability to maintain even minimally cordial relationships outside the political arena. That's a great loss to everyone because we all suffer the consequences.

I would certainly argue here that it is almost exclusively the fault of the right that cordial disagreement has become an oxymoron in political debate. Shawn Hannity...Rush "Hillbilly Heroin" Limbaugh...Anne Coulter...All of them make people that disagree with them out to be evil, stupid, or both. Unfortunately, we have a president that has that same attitude.

Sure, there are people on the left that have taken that same approach of late, but it's as much out of defense as it is out of actual rancor for all things republican. My best friend in the world is a Bush supporter, and we have political discussions all the time....but it NEVER degenerates into the kind of hate speech shown by the people I mentioned above. Shoot, there are people on this very board that I disagree with all the time, but that I could easily sit face to face with and have the same conversation....then there are those that make me so sick to my stomach that it's probably a darn good thing that we've got miles and miles of wires between us.

You want to know why this has happened ? Take a look at the nauseating comments made about Max Cleeland earlier in this thread, and you'll have your answer.

 

[faithinkarma]

Originally posted by ThAnswr
Actually, if the converstion around the local American Legion Post bar is any indication, many veterans are looking into the allegations and are finding out the truth for themselves and not quite what is portrayed by the Republicans, Swift Boat vets, or the right wing talking heads.

My husband is a navy vet, and a Kerry supporter. His father was career army, and a firm Bush supporter. Or he was a firm Bush supporter until the attempted smear of Kerry. Even before the web of lies began to fall apart, my father-in-law was disgusted by the SBVs. It was enough to push him to the other side. And I would have bet money that could never have happened, never in a million years.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by ThAnswr
Thank you. Hurricane Charley re-arranged our landscape, our roof, our garage door, our interior decorating, and my daughter's school schedule.

Other than that, we're back to normal.

Truthfully, we're lucky to be alive.

Yea, welcome back and glad youse guyz are ok.

See, I can be nice sometimes.

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by AirForceRocks
So what does one have to do in this country to be considered worthy of criticizing Mr. Cleland, or anyone else for that matter?

Criticize his policy positions, his statements, or his "bahavior" all you want. But making the accusation that he's basically using his amputee status for political purposes is disgusting.

Originally posted by AirForceRocks
Hmmm...so now it's "vile and disgusting" to criticize someone for using their war injuries for political purposes?

Yes, it is, and I'd say the same thing if someone accused Bob Dole of doing it.