quade 4 #1 October 13, 2004 http://www.optruth.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=mediaCampaign&lnav=2quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrunkMonkey 0 #2 October 13, 2004 Ok, against my better judgement, "Why not?" Don't tell me "Giving aid & comfort to the enemy," because this does not rise to that level. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #3 October 13, 2004 Because he'll get skewered the same way Kerry, McCain and Max Cleland has. Also, Ann Coulter will call him a traitor for speaking out against the Administration during the war.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrunkMonkey 0 #4 October 13, 2004 QuoteBecause he'll get skewered the same way Kerry, McCain and Max Cleland has. Also, Ann Coulter will call him a traitor for speaking out against the Administration during the war. Eh...Yeah, because Ann Coulter is the barometer for the whim of the American Electorate... I'd vote for McCain in a nanosecond. He's not a drone to his party line. He *gasp!* Thinks for himself...oh no!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #5 October 13, 2004 Read this one: http://www.optruth.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=userShowStories&userID=74779 -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #6 October 13, 2004 > Ok, against my better judgement, "Why not?" Conservatives will claim he intentionally got wounded to get out of serving. They will finance a group of Gulf War 1 vets to say that he was an awful soldier, and someone will find a quote of him saying "I ended up having to shoot that kid" and use it to prove he's a war criminal. There will be books about how he was unfit to serve, and conservative bloggers will list "The 37 Lies Of Robert Acosta." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #7 October 13, 2004 I have always maintained that our soldiers are nobel and well intentioned, but their leaders in Washington . . . that's another issue. It is important that our soldiers buy into the war. Without them feeling as if they are doing the right thing, they simply won't do what has to be done. Hopefully none of our soldiers would ever raise his weapon and kill another human without thinking it was the right thing to do. This I understand. However, afterward, upon reflection, some do see the problems while others maintain their beliefs so as not to become "murderers". That said, it's also important that their leaders do the right thing and not put them in harms way unless it is absolutely the only thing left to do. I can, objectively, understand both sides of the issues because I was not directly involved in the Vietnam war or any actions in Iraq. I maintain that those people that have had to experience those conflicts are forever changed by the experience and I can understand why some people would want to confront what has happened even at their own expense and other would choose not to. It is not my place to say which is right and which is wrong because I was never there. I don't think it's anyone else's place to say either, even if they where there because they have no exact idea what the "other guy" had to go through and, as I've said, they may also have some psychological reasons of their own. For a soldier to confront his truth is perhaps harder than confronting the enemy. He only need face the enemy for a specific time. He will confront his truth the rest of his life.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #8 October 13, 2004 pst....he did not read it."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #9 October 13, 2004 Does he only have half a face?People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #10 October 13, 2004 It's really interesting that if you read what some of the stories, and postings you find they agree with the reason to be there...http://www.optruth.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=userShowStories&userID=74020"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #11 October 13, 2004 Quote> Ok, against my better judgement, "Why not?" Conservatives will claim he intentionally got wounded to get out of serving. They will finance a group of Gulf War 1 vets to say that he was an awful soldier, and someone will find a quote of him saying "I ended up having to shoot that kid" and use it to prove he's a war criminal. There will be books about how he was unfit to serve, and conservative bloggers will list "The 37 Lies Of Robert Acosta." Bill, you are sounding a bit paranoid. Kerry has a lot of 'splaining to do for his actions in Vietnam that were witnessed by many highly decorated vets. The guys on Kerry's boat aren't the only ones that saw what happened on various missions. Did he inadvertantly kill civilians on the sampan, as some of the vets serving with him witnessed, or did he heroicly battle VC on a sampan as his report documented? This is just one example. Kerry himself said he was a war criminal/committed atrocities, Conservatives don't have to 'finance' vets to lie as you imply. Why can't Kerry answer questions related to all these accusations, if they are not true. It would be his chance to look like a hero again. Instead, he says, "All you need to know is who financed these commercials". Sounds like a big fat cop-out to me. Just because Bush avoided serving in the war does not cancel out Kerry's actions.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mirage63 0 #12 October 13, 2004 Well said, waiting for Bill's reply Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #13 October 13, 2004 Quote"All you need to know is who financed these commercials". Because that's the bottom line. Defending himself from these allegations only distracts from other campaign matters and aren't going to convince anyone that would believe what these guys are saying anyway. It's a paper tiger. The truth is these same guys used the same tactics against Cleland and McCain. They have zero credibility unless you're somoene who wants to believe them. And if you are, then Kerry defending himself isn't going to convince you anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #14 October 13, 2004 Pssst . . . yes I did. Pssst . . . quit thinking you know what I've read.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #15 October 13, 2004 QuotePssst . . . yes I did. Pssst . . . quit thinking you know what I've read. But you didn't come to the exact same conclusion that he did when he read it, so surely you must not have read it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #16 October 13, 2004 >Bill, you are sounding a bit paranoid. And then you go on to list all the reasons that Kerry's service is suspect. Replace "Kerry" with "Acosta" and you have the new spin. >Conservatives don't have to 'finance' vets to lie as you imply. Then why did they? >Why can't Kerry answer questions related to all these accusations, if they are not true. He has; conservatives simply choose to believe he has not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penniless 0 #17 October 13, 2004 Quote>Bill, you are sounding a bit paranoid. And then you go on to list all the reasons that Kerry's service is suspect. Replace "Kerry" with "Acosta" and you have the new spin. >Conservatives don't have to 'finance' vets to lie as you imply. Then why did they? They had to do something with their tax savings. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #18 October 13, 2004 Quotehttp://www.optruth.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=mediaCampaign&lnav=2 The general thrust of Robert Acosta's quote there seems to be, "You should oppose the war, because our guys get hurt." That's war. That's expected to happen. If we didn't fight any war (justified or not) because of fear ofhaving wounded, we'd never fight any wars and we'd be conquered as a result, at some time. Yes, it sucks that people lose arms in war. It's not a reason to never fight for what is right. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #19 October 14, 2004 QuoteQuote"All you need to know is who financed these commercials". Because that's the bottom line. Defending himself from these allegations only distracts from other campaign matters and aren't going to convince anyone that would believe what these guys are saying anyway. It's a paper tiger. The truth is these same guys used the same tactics against Cleland and McCain. They have zero credibility unless you're somoene who wants to believe them. And if you are, then Kerry defending himself isn't going to convince you anyway. So a Dem not answering allegations does it because it distracts and does not convince, but a Repub not answering allegations is implicitly admitting their truth (I know you did not say this, but that is the traditional line). Cleland is a piece of shit! Did you happen to hear the crap that spewed from his mouth when he delivered the letter to the Crawford ranch on behalf of the Kerry campaign? I don't care if he was crippled while fighting for our country, it doesn't excuse the excrement that I watched fall out of his face. And he did it explicitly for Kerry, with many of the Dem leadership right behind him. Quite shameful. If a Repub had done the same at one of Kerry's mansions, there would have been outrage and an expectation of an apology from Bush. But instead, Kerry gets a pass. If Kerry was so sure of his record and the truth to what happened in Vietnam, then he could make his critics look like fools and score big points for himself. That is the risk that critics take when they make such accusations. It is called "backlash". The young vet in the new ad takes a risk by putting his story out - being an advocate for a cause. If he has skeletons in his closet, then should he be immune from the possibility of them falling out? Advocates for Bush (including the swift boat vets org) are quickly called liars by the Dem leadership. When Bush is accused of irregularities in his Nat'l Guard service, he orders the Pentagon to release everything (which they didn't do well-keep finding more-it has pissed Bush off) and answer the allegations. He has been defending himself against such attacks since he ran for office in Texas, without resorting to "they lie about me, just look at who is paying for it". "All you need to know is who financed these commercials" is a huge, big, cowardly copout. edit - the assertion of the thread title - that he can not run for public office is of course not true, as proven by Kerry after he said that atrocities were systematic...People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #20 October 14, 2004 Well, I came away from his story with a slightly different message (no surprize there eh?). What I was reading was that he got held up in the stop loss, did more than some and after he got hurt . . . wasn't exactly welcomed home or recognized by the Administration for his service. All of that sounded, to me, vaguely like a lot of stories I'd heard from the guys that came back from the Vietnam war. What this country did to them, should never be repeated. They served with honor as best they could and then were ignored . . . and to a large extent, are still ignored. Consider the funding cuts GWB made the VA health care. A lot of people said Iraq was going to be GWB's Vietnam and a lot of people said that it wouldn't be . . . everyday, to me, it sounds more and more like it is.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #21 October 14, 2004 QuoteI can, objectively, understand both sides of the issues because I was not directly involved in the Vietnam war or any actions in Iraq. I maintain that those people that have had to experience those conflicts are forever changed by the experience and I can understand why some people would want to confront what has happened even at their own expense and other would choose not to. I am sorry, but were you ever directly involved in any actions, anywhere, at any time? mike Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #22 October 14, 2004 No. Sorry if I gave that impression. I had thought I made it perfectly clear I had not, even in the part you quoted. I did do some JROTC type stuff in preparation for the day I -thought- I'd enter service, but the draft for the war in Vietnam ended just a few months prior to me having to register. My experiences in the JROTC program had pretty much turned me off to any volunteer service. I had done well at almost everything I had done with it, but saw the reduction in service as a stumbling block to the path I wanted to take within it. At a later point in my life, 27.5 years old to be exact, I regretted not having joined and taking advantage of certain experiences and at that point, it was too late. When I say I can objectively understand both sides of the issues, I say that from the stand point of NOT having served and therefore without any emotional prejudice toward or against having to face whether or not what I had done was morally correct. I know a few Vietnam vets and they are highly emotional over the issue of whether or not Kerry had done wrong by them. I try not to pass judgement on this since, I've never walked in their shoes.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #23 October 14, 2004 Well, I really cannot see where you gathered the understanding of which you speak. mike Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #24 October 14, 2004 Understanding a person's position does not -require- having to have had all of the same experiences they've had. It certainly helps, but it's not required. I do not need to be a woman to understand one's position on choice. I probably -do- need to be a woman to rightfully pass judgement on it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #25 October 14, 2004 QuoteI can, objectively, understand both sides of the issues because I was not directly involved in the Vietnam war or any actions in Iraq. If not being directly involved in something was all that was required to be an objective observer, this would be a much simpler world.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
