PDA

View Full Version : In Defense of John Kerry


Overdose
07-31-2004, 07:22 PM
Personally I’m getting rather aggravated with the Republicans trashing John Kerry’s record in the Senate, and in Vietnam (oh and flip flopping).
--------------
John Kerry’s service in Vietnam showed leadership, and quick decision making skills. His band of brothers have stood by him. Every person who served with John Kerry (but one) agrees that he showed true leadership in Vietnam. When I see the Veterans Against John Kerry, I want to puke. The majority of them did not serve with Kerry, and have no validation to what they are spewing. The Right Wing refuses to listen to the people who served under Kerry, yet they find it perfectly acceptable to believe Veterans who have no knowledge as to what Kerry was like during Vietnam.

The next attack they love to throw out is how he attacked our troops at home. Although that is somewhat true, he more so attacked the policies our Government had during Vietnam. The policies that forced our men to go into villages and kill innocent women and children, while burning their villages. If the Right Wing has a problem with him protesting that (our polices), then they need to get a reality check. The soldiers he may have attacked, were the ones who raped women and did far more then what was ordered of them.

I’m willing to admit he did exaggerate the truth in some respects during Vietnam. But what the Republicans fail to remember is that it was an extremely emotional time for Americans. Emotions were high, and the country was viciously divided. America was not listening to the so-called hippies, who were the “low lives” of our society. Which thus put pressure on John Kerry and other Veterans to make a stand against this war. Since he had to make a gigantic impact he sometimes exaggerated the truth, and in rare occasions lied. If you also cannot understand that he was naïve’, being in his 20’s, then you again are not being understandable. Overall if you attack him for this, you do not understand the era he was in or the age he was.

Another thing they cease to never recollect is that he has apologized for the exaggerations he made. What else do they want from him? He has done all he can do for the few faults he had. People do make mistakes, just like George Bush and his addiction to drugs and being AWOL.

John Kerry also led the expedition in the Senate to find all the missing POW’s in Vietnam…that were not accounted for. He did show respect to our troops, as shown with this example.

I also find it highly ironic that they awarded him a Bronze and a Silver Star, and commended him for his “wonderful service”. Yet when he starts to attack this war at home, he is now this “liar, and disgrace to our military” And sadly you can’t have it both ways.

Righties love to say, he disrespected the troops by throwing his ribbons and other peoples medals over the fence. Yet, it’s his decision to do so. And the other medals he “may” have been throwing were of Veterans who wanted their medals thrown. So in all actuality he did nothing wrong.
----------------------
Next is their onslaught against him for being in the Senate. It’s highly funny how they think calling him the most “liberal” senator will discourage us from liking him. I can’t see anything that good OR bad about him being a Senator. I’m not very knowledgeable to his votes in the Senate, but the Republicans don’t seem to be either. He’s the most liberal senator, as far as I can tell from them. And I’m a liberal, so, more power to him.
---------------
Flip Flopper? Yes…No? Maybe so?
I don’t fee like going through it all, so here is a Blog from our Al Franken, who refutes all of the Right Wing attacks on Kerry being a flip flopper...

Sean Hannity and the Right Wing thinks Kerry is a flip flopper because...of this next set of lies....

"Here’s a guy that supported gay marriage, now against it. Here’s a guy that by my count has had six separate different unique positions on the war on Iraq. Here’s a guy that voted for the $87 billion to fund the war before he voted against it. Here’s a guy that was for the Patriot Act. Now against it. No Child Left Behind, for it, now against it. Here’s a guy that supported -- was against the death penalty for terrorists who kill Americans. Now he’s for it. The only thing he seems consistent on is that, throughout the 19 years he was in the Senate, he voted to raise taxes consistently 350 times. What does that tell us about a man that has no core values or principles?"

The liberal reply, by Al Franken...

~Here’s a guy that supported gay marriage, now against it.~

This is a lie. Kerry’s position has always been consistent on this. I disagree with him, but Kerry has always been against gay marriage. He is for civil unions. What Hannity is doing here is taking Kerry’s vote against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and deliberately misrepresenting it as a declaration in favor of gay marriage. But let me read you what Kerry said on the floor of the Senate about that vote.

“I will vote against this bill, though I am not for same-sex marriage, because I believe that this debate is fundamentally ugly, and it is fundamentally political, and it is fundamentally flawed….the results of this bill will not be to preserve anything, but will serve to attack a group of people out of various motives and rationales, and certainly out of a lack of understanding and a lack of tolerance, and will only serve the purposes of the political season.”

And on that, I totally agree with him. So, for the record: Kerry has been totally consistent on this. He has never flip-flopped. Sean Hannity is lying, and he knows it.

Next.

~Here’s a guy that by my count has had six separate different unique positions on the war on Iraq. ~

Okay. This is just stupid. Kerry’s position on Iraq has been totally consistent. Yes, he voted to authorize the president to use force against Iraq. But voted for that in order for Bush to go to the UN and get the inspectors back into Iraq, which was a genuine triumph. But, the president acted in bad faith. Here is what Kerry said about it on Face the Nation on September 14, 2003:

“The president promised he would go to war as a matter of last resort. He didn’t. The president promised he would build a coalition and work through the United Nations. He didn’t. We’re paying the price for the reckless way in which this president approached this. It’s a failure of diplomacy, and today it’s a failure of leadership.”

Kerry was entirely consistent, and not only that, he was right.

Next.

~Here’s a guy that voted for the $87 billion to fund the war before he voted against it.~

This is correct, but it’s not a flip-flop. Kerry voted for an amendment to the Iraqi appropriations bill that would have paid for the $87 billion by taking it out of the tax cut for the extremely rich. That amendment lost, 57-42, because Bush insisted that the $87 billion be added to the deficit. As we discussed with Paul Krugman last week, never in the history of this country have we had tax cuts while we were at war. Not only that, but Paul Krugman told me that he has yet to find any civilization in the history of this planet that ever had a tax cut during a war.

After the amendment went down, Kerry did vote against the final $87 billion supplemental appropriation, as a protest against the way Bush got us into the war and is conducting it. But he knew that the troops would have the support, because the bill passed 87 to 12.

You can support our troops, and still protest the president. If you can’t hold those two ideas in your head, you won’t enjoy my show, and I suggest you switch over to Rush right now.

Next.

~Here’s a guy that was for the Patriot Act. Now against it.~

Well, here’s what Kerry said:

“I voted for the Patriot Act right after September 11th – convinced that – with a sunset clause – it was the right decision to make. It clearly wasn’t a perfect bill – and it had a number of flaws – but this wasn’t the time to haggle. It was the time to act.

"But George Bush and John Ashcroft abused the spirit of national action after the terrorist attacks. They have used the Patriot Act in ways that were never intended and for reasons that have nothing to do with terrorism. That’s why, as President, I will propose new anti-terrorism laws that advance the War on Terror while ending the assault on our basic rights.”

In other words, he voted for the Patriot Act after 9/11, although he objected to parts of it. Bush has abused it in ways that were never intended by Congress when it was passed. If you can’t hold that in your head, you will love Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

~No Child Left Behind, for it, now against it.~

This is an easy one. On this one, like all the others, Kerry’s position is consistent, and principled, and Hannity’s is dishonest. Kerry voted for the bill, which the president promised to fund. The president didn’t fund it, which created unfunded mandates on states and school districts across this country. As a result, classroom sizes are getting bigger, after-school programs are being dropped, teachers are being fired, and education is getting worse. Everyone in education across this country will tell you that. No Child Left Behind is the most ironically named piece of legislation since the 1942 Japanese Family Leave Act.

Next.

~Here’s a guy that supported -- was against the death penalty for terrorists who kill Americans. Now he’s for it.~

Actually, Sean’s right on this one. Kerry was against the death penalty before 9/11. And after 9/11, he now supports the death penalty for terrorists. Now, Bush—before 9/11, wanted to invade Iraq. And after it, wanted to invade Iraq. So maybe he was more consistent. Kerry was affected viscerally by 9/11. I’m not sure I’d call that a flip-flop.

Next.

~The only thing he seems consistent on is that, throughout the 19 years he was in the Senate, he voted to raise taxes consistently 350 times.~

This is a disgraceful lie. It is a distortion of a phony statistic put out by the Bush campaign. The Bush campaign lists 350 of Kerry’s votes for, quote, “higher taxes.” Almost all of these are votes Kerry cast to leave taxes unchanged, such as a 1987 vote against a repeal of the “windfall profit” tax on oil. Taxes would have remained the same if his side had prevailed. In other words, this was a vote against an irresponsible tax cut for the rich.

Let me make a side note. We need to pay for the government. Someone’s got to pay for it. And if you cut taxes for the rich, the burden gets shifted to everyone else, or their children.

Bush’s list even includes votes that Kerry cast in favor of alternative Democratic tax cuts. On Bush’s list, there’s only one actual tax increase that Kerry voted for, which incidentally is counted twice. It’s his vote for Clinton’s 1993 Deficit Reduction Act, which raised taxes on the top 1% and cut taxes on people at the bottom, and was followed by eight years of unprecedented growth.

Look. The reason I took the time to go over all of this is you’re going to hear this garbage repeated over, and over, and over again from now until November. And we are not going to let them do it. We are not going to let them do to John Kerry what they did to Al Gore.

Kerry is not a flip-flopper. Bush is a liar. And his shills in the media, like Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh—they’re liars too.
~ Al Franken

KERRY IS NOT A FLIP FLOPPER!
------------
Thanks for playing Republicans...NOW SHOVE IT!

Travh20
07-31-2004, 11:39 PM
and yada-yada-yada, an al franken quote sums it all up

Overdose
07-31-2004, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
and yada-yada-yada, an al franken quote sums it all up

Sadly you failed to read it. Kerry is not a flip flopper...get over yourself. It's proven, and if you fail to read what I post, don't bother posting your two cents about it.

Travh20
07-31-2004, 11:58 PM
"I voted for the 87 billion, before I voted agaisnt it" ya, he is no flip flopper :rolleyes:

Overdose
08-01-2004, 12:09 AM
Originally posted by Travh20
"I voted for the 87 billion, before I voted agaisnt it" ya, he is no flip flopper :rolleyes:

Re-Read:

This is correct, but it’s not a flip-flop. Kerry voted for an amendment to the Iraqi appropriations bill that would have paid for the $87 billion by taking it out of the tax cut for the extremely rich. That amendment lost, 57-42, because Bush insisted that the $87 billion be added to the deficit. As we discussed with Paul Krugman last week, never in the history of this country have we had tax cuts while we were at war. Not only that, but Paul Krugman told me that he has yet to find any civilization in the history of this planet that ever had a tax cut during a war.

After the amendment went down, Kerry did vote against the final $87 billion supplemental appropriation, as a protest against the way Bush got us into the war and is conducting it. But he knew that the troops would have the support, because the bill passed 87 to 12.

You can support our troops, and still protest the president. If you can’t hold those two ideas in your head, you won’t enjoy my show, and I suggest you switch over to Rush right now.

~Al Franken

Travh20
08-01-2004, 12:55 AM
give me some evidence he only wanted it if it were taken out of the tax breaks for the extremely rich

Overdose
08-01-2004, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by Travh20
give me some evidence he only wanted it if it were taken out of the tax breaks for the extremely rich

Go to his website and it will tell you that he wants the rich to be taxed. He’s said that all along, and if you cannot understand that, it’s not our fault.

Travh20
08-02-2004, 09:54 AM
you see, I dont give a crap what john kerrys web site says. you are impossible. you say nothing i post is relevant yet tell me to go to his CAMPAIGN WEB SITE?? why dont you practice what you preach for once overdose.

The Praetorian
08-02-2004, 02:01 PM
Because feeble minds aren't able to, Trav. I feel bad for the kid. After all his blathering, he won't even be able to vote this year, but he advises that you shouldn't put your two cents in because you didn't read something (presumptively) that supports his ill-informed beliefs. :rolleyes: What a sad clown...

Overdose
08-02-2004, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by The Praetorian
I feel bad for the kid. After all his blathering, he won't even be able to vote this year, but he advises that you shouldn't put your two cents in because you didn't read something (presumptively) that supports his ill-informed beliefs. :rolleyes: What a sad clown...

The Praetorian, I would suggest you stay on topic and quiet trying to ruin my reputation on this board. The ironic thing is, you just dance around the issues, label me too young, call my beliefs “ill-informed”, and then go on your dandy way. Sadly, it doesn’t work like that. I’m not going to let you say things about me that are not true. If my thoughts are so wrong would you care to point out where? Or are you just going to send another reply on how I’m not good at “debate” and how I’m not “worth your time”…so you can again dance around the issues…?

Echo2
08-02-2004, 02:24 PM
Trav - it seems you believe everything that comes off the bush web site, but nothing that comes off the Kerry web site. Interesting considering who has been caught telling the big ones for the last three years.

Why was it that we went to war?
Who promised no child left behind?
Who stated "mission accomplished"?

Travh20
08-02-2004, 02:46 PM
actually I have never been to the Bush web site. I dont even really like the guy myself. I think he is a wreckless spender and to liberal. I do however trust him a lot more on security issues. John Kerrys voting record on defense issues is horrible.

Overdose
08-02-2004, 04:07 PM
Trav, you asked me why John Kerry would only vote for the bill if the rich were going to get taxed. And I told you to go to his website because it shows he is for ending the tax breaks for the rich, which would thus show you why he would only vote for the bill if the rich were taxed. If you don’t want to do so, then fine. I’m not forcing you…I’m simply answering a question you had.

Travh20
08-02-2004, 04:16 PM
you know what, bill clinton also promised not to raise midle class taxes, but he did. excuse me if I have to laugh when a democrat promises to keep tax increases confined to one sector of america. its a lie overdose, he will raise taxes for everyone. sure, he says he wont, but he will in the end, mark my words. t is impossible for a liveral democrat to stop raising taxes once they start.

Overdose
08-02-2004, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
you know what, bill clinton also promised not to raise midle class taxes, but he did.
Is Clinton running? No. The Right Wing loves to bring Clinton into the situation to justify their false attacks. And if I don’t recall correctly wasn’t it Bush’s Father who said, “Read My Lips, No New Taxes!” and what did he do?

Originally posted by Travh20
its a lie overdose, he will raise taxes for everyone.
I’m glad you can foresee the future, Trav. Yet, I’m not so sure you’re correct. But I would not mind a tax increase. Although I don’t pay taxes, and I don't know...but personally I believe it would better our country.

We could actually fund no child left behind, and lessen our deficit. And you know that in a war time, George Bush is the only President to ever have a tax break. Funny how that works out.

Travh20
08-02-2004, 04:32 PM
bill clinton was the last democrat president, who else should I compare John Kerry too? The last democrat president who said he wouldnt raise taxes did, end of story. John Kerry will raise taxes on everyone too. I know bush senior said he wouldnt do it and did it too, so if you feel more comfortable having me compare kerry to him so be it. Also, thanks for feeling so free to spend my money for me with your tax increases. I know the government will spend it real wisely and it will do much better in their pocket then mine.

Overdose
08-02-2004, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
bill clinton was the last democrat president, who else should I compare John Kerry too?
Maybe you shouldn’t compare at all. Not all Democrats are the same, and Clinton did have a history of making somewhat false statements…so I don’t think the comparison is fair.

Originally posted by Travh20
The last democrat president who said he wouldnt raise taxes did, end of story.
The last Republican President (before Bush) was Bush Senior. And he said, “Read my lips no new taxes” and I do recall him raising taxes…

Originally posted by Travh20
John Kerry will raise taxes on everyone too.
Well hopefully we can if he does raise taxes get rid of our deficit, pay for these two wars, fund no child left behind, fund the environment programs, and everything else Bush is ignoring.

Originally posted by Travh20
I know bush senior said he wouldnt do it and did it too
No, I’m just trying to say that when you compare Clinton to Kerry, in trying to deem Kerry as a liar, I can do the same. I can say well Bush’s father lied, so Bush must be lying about everything to. It just doesn’t work that way Trav.

Travh20
08-02-2004, 04:54 PM
you do say bush is lying about everything overdose.

Overdose
08-02-2004, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
you do say bush is lying about everything overdose.

Good reply, Trav. No, I really don’t think he lied anymore, he’s just reckless, and moronic. But, wrong again Trav.

Travh20
08-02-2004, 05:00 PM
oh, so all that talk about lying to get us into war is no moer? man you are one flip flopping kid. First you insisted the Bin laden family was flown out of the US without being questioned, then it was they were not questioned enough. then you insisted bush lied, and people died, now he didnt lie, he is just an idiot.

Overdose
08-02-2004, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
oh, so all that talk about lying to get us into war is no moer?
I think he tried very hard to get us into war, even though we didn’t need to go to Iraq. Personally I believe he was miss-informed, but I do believe it was Cheney and his visits to the CIA who really made our intelligence false. Honestly, if it was anyone it would be Cheney. And George Bush also met with Chalabi, who was a huge intelligence provider to us, even though he was a liar and a fraud. All in all, I don’t think he lied, he just mislead us.

Originally posted by Travh20
man you are one flip flopping kid.
I’m sorry you have a huge thing against changing opinions on issues. I’m sorry I’m willing to admit I was wrong about things, and thus have a new opinion.

Originally posted by Travh20
First you insisted the Bin laden family was flown out of the US without being questioned, then it was they were not questioned enough.
I did research and then I changed my opinion based on new information. I’m sorry that’s so horrible. It’s proven they were not questioned enough, and that debate has been long over with.

Originally posted by Travh20
then you insisted bush lied, and people died, now he didnt lie, he is just an idiot.
Awhile back I did believe he lied, now I believe he altered the intelligence to fit his needs, Cheney scammed a lot of it, and then he used information that was deliberately false to his advantage. Not a lie, just misleading us with shifted information and not giving the other half.

Travh20
08-02-2004, 05:10 PM
this is why nothing you says has much meaning to me. before you start flapping your gums and insisting things you better damn well be sure about it, just a little suggestion to help you out in life. no one likes getting lectured by someone who comes back the next day with a different story. Its not OK to change your views all the time. its not a good trait.

Overdose
08-02-2004, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
this is why nothing you says has much meaning to me.
Sorry to hear that Trav…

Originally posted by Travh20
before you start flapping your gums and insisting things you better damn well be sure about it
Sorry, Trav. Isn’t this what online debate is for? To change people’s opinions…and see the other side? And I think you’ve had your fair share of being wrong about issues.

Originally posted by Travh20
no one likes getting lectured by someone who comes back the next day with a different story.
I have rarely changed my opinions on most issues…and when I do, it takes awhile to shift my thoughts. I don’t do it every day, thank you very much.

Originally posted by Travh20
Its not OK to change your views all the time. its not a good trait.
Just like it’s not a good trait to never change your opinion or admit you’re wrong. And I don’t change my opinions all the time.

Travh20
08-02-2004, 05:28 PM
overdose, I never claim anything unless I am 100% sure of it. the reason is because I dont want to be wrong. I know micheal moore is a liar, as you do now. I know the democrats are hiding kerrys senate record, as I onlyhear about it from his opponents while he is as quiet as a mouse about it. these are things I observe, and they are true. i dont have to see the moore movie to know that it is just wishful thinking to claim osama bin ladens family was whisked away with not even as much as a question. its idiotic to think that. most of what oy argue can be blown away with comon sense, and no, there is no link to common sense, you have to earn it.

Overdose
08-02-2004, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
overdose, I never claim anything unless I am 100% sure of it.
Again, you’ve been wrong before.

Originally posted by Travh20
I know micheal moore is a liar, as you do now.
I know that?

Originally posted by Travh20
I know the democrats are hiding kerrys senate record
Why aren’t the Republicans trashing it if it’s such a bad record…? Honestly, George Bush didn’t go on his record as Governor, so why do you feel Kerry should be forced to go off his?

Originally posted by Travh20
i dont have to see the moore movie to know that it is just wishful thinking to claim osama bin ladens family was whisked away with not even as much as a question.
A few were not questioned. And Moore never said they were not questioned, I said that, and I was wrong. Moore said they were not questioned properly or long enough, which is true. If you fail to realize this, I’m sorry.

Travh20
08-02-2004, 05:35 PM
oh so the bin ladens were not questioned up to moores standards? thats too bad :rolleyes: and if you want to go over bushs governer record lets do it, but while were at it, I want to go over kerrys recorcd as senator.

Overdose
08-02-2004, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
oh so the bin ladens were not questioned up to moores standards? thats too bad

It didn’t meet a lot of people’s standards, Trav.
----------
Last year, the National Review reported that the FBI conducted brief, day-of-departure interviews with the Saudis -- in the words of an FBI spokesman, "at the airport, as they were about to leave." Experts interviewed by the National Review called the FBI's actions "highly unusual" given the fact that those departing were actually members of Osama bin Laden's family. "They [the FBI] could not have done a thorough and complete interview," said John L.Martin, the former head of internal security at the Justice Department. "The Great Escape How did assorted bin Ladens get out of America after September 11?" National Review, September 29, 2003.

“Thirty of the 142 people on these flights were interviewed by the FBI, including 22 of the 26 people (23 passengers and 3 private security guards) on the Bin Ladin flight. Many were asked detailed questions. None of the passengers stated that they had any recent contact with Usama Bin Ladin or knew anything about terrorist activity." National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Threats and Responses in 2001, Staff Statement No. 10, The Saudi Flights, p. 12; http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing10/staff_statement_10.pdf

“I talked to several people who were with the FBI during the actual repatriation. And they told me there was a lot of back-and-forth between the FBI and the Saudi Embassy. And the Saudi Embassy tried to get people to leave without even identifying them. The FBI succeeded in identifying people and going through their passports. But, in many cases, you had the FBI meeting people for the first time on the tarmac or on the planes themselves as they were departing. That was not time for a serious interview or a serious interrogation.” Interview with Craig Unger, CNN, September 4, 2003.
-------------
Only thirty were questioned, and it proves that they were not questioned long enough, they didn’t have time for intense questioning, and sometimes it was right on the plane itself. So actually it shouldn’t meet the standards of anyone....

Originally posted by Travh20
and if you want to go over bushs governer record lets do it, but while were at it, I want to go over kerrys recorcd as senator.
No, I’m just saying that the attacks on Kerry for not going on his record are silly, because Bush didn’t go on his record…either.

Lungdop Philing
08-02-2004, 06:29 PM
Shane: So you're Jack Wilson.
Jack Wilson: What's that mean to you, Shane?
Shane: I've heard about you.
Jack Wilson: What have you heard, Shane?

** Shane: I've heard that you're a low-down Yankee liar. **

Jack Wilson: Prove it.

dewdo
08-06-2004, 01:25 PM
Three Purple Hearts in four months along with the Bronze Star and Silver Star!!!!

As a 14 month combat veteran of the Korean War I can assure you I wouldn't have stood around that man. He was drawing fire!!!!! I wonder if he would show his conbat scars? I got some, but but never got the Purple Heart. We let the guys that could not return to combat right away have those.

Dewdo in the other Washington

Travh20
08-06-2004, 01:51 PM
I find it strange to call someone who get 3 purple hearts, spends no time in a hospital, has no scars and gets out of serving on a technicality a hero. this has nothing to do with bush! so dont go there. I am saying, as a combat veteran myself, that those credentials dont add up to Sgt York. When I think of a hero, I think of guys getting wounded and breaking out of the hospital to rejoin their units. guys who get hit, slap a bandage on and keep fighting. Going to the infirmary for a scatch and using some obscure law about 3 P.H's and your out doesnt sound to heroic. I am not saying the guy didnt fight and get shot at, but I am saying he may be playing it up a wee bit.

The Praetorian
08-06-2004, 02:33 PM
As a 14 month combat veteran of the Korean War I can assure you I wouldn't have stood around that man. He was drawing fire!!!!! I wonder if he would show his conbat scars? I got some, but but never got the Purple Heart. We let the guys that could not return to combat right away have those.

First off, thanks for your service. Secondly, this has been debated round and round in various threads, and due to the overwhelming majority of liberals on this forum, your logic won't be recognized. Combat veterans from all over seem to say exactly the same thing that you and Trav have attested to here, which leads me to believe that either Kerry is bullet proof or full of shit. Take your pick...

Personally, I feel that we should test the theory... :)

dewdo
08-06-2004, 03:51 PM
On The Fence ??

I'm trying to get all this political stuff straightened out in my head, so I'll know how to vote come November. Right now, we have one guy saying one thing. Then the other guy says something else. Who to believe. Lemme see, have I got this straight?

Clinton awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Yugoslavia - good...
Bush awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Iraq - bad...

Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia - good...
Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq - bad...

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - good...
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...

Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian
terrorists - good...
Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator - bad...

Clinton bombs Chinese embassy - good...
Bush bombs terrorist camps - bad...

Clinton commits felonies while in office - good...
Bush lands on aircraft carrier in jumpsuit - bad...

Clinton says mass graves in Serbia - good...
Entire world says WMD in Iraq - bad...

No mass graves found in Serbia - good...
No WMD found Iraq - bad...

Stock market crashes in 2000 under Clinton - good...
Recession under Bush - bad...

Clinton refuses to take custody of Bin Laden - good...
World Trade Centers fall under Bush - bad...

Clinton says Saddam has nukes - good...
Bush says Saddam has nukes - bad...

Clinton calls for regime change in Iraq - good...
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...

Terrorist training in Afghanistan under Clinton - good...
Bush destroys training camps in Afghanistan - bad...

Milosevic not yet convicted - good...
Saddam in custody - bad...

Politics are so confusing.

Echo2
08-06-2004, 04:21 PM
And here is what is so strange about all that you just posted. When clinton did it, the republicans where all over him like flies on shit. But when bush does it it is OK because the last guy did it?

Remember your mother saying..."If johney jumps off a bridge does that mean you are going to do it too?".

Maybe bush should screw his intern , then he can tell Laura - hey, clinton did it so why can't I? See how far he gets with that one.

Evil Homer
08-06-2004, 04:22 PM
Politics are so confusing.
Amen!

Overdose
08-06-2004, 09:46 PM
We know the Republicans all to well. Sadly, Clinton isn’t running…and just because Clinton had his mistakes doesn’t mean George Bush is okay in making his.

I’m not going to go through your entire list that is so simple minded. I will, however point out one that is very wrong.

Clinton says Saddam has nukes - good...
Bush says Saddam has nukes - bad...

You refuse to understand that the UN was in Iraq during 2000, and found no weapons of any substance. Which is why Clinton, before 2000 said the remarks he did about Saddam having weapons. Different times, different information.

dewdo
08-06-2004, 10:10 PM
I put it up there in a simple way so the simple people can understand it.

Dewdo in the other Washington

Overdose
08-06-2004, 10:13 PM
I’m sure you did, but no matter what…this is a thread about John Kerry, not Clinton or Bush.

dewdo
08-06-2004, 10:54 PM
As you can notice I mentioned no names.

Dewdo in the other Washington

Travh20
08-07-2004, 12:05 AM
I like this dwedo guy.

Overdose
08-07-2004, 02:20 AM
Originally posted by Travh20
I like this dwedo guy.

As you would...
Because you like Republicans that actually sometimes make sense.

Except he's just like you in this respect. Bring Clinton into the situation, so they can excuse Bush from all of his faults. Perfect!

Travh20
08-07-2004, 05:51 PM
as I said, I like the dwedo guy a lot

Overdose
08-07-2004, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
as I said, I like the dwedo guy a lot

As you would...because you are oblivious to most things.

Travh20
08-07-2004, 06:01 PM
did you just learn the word oblivious in your 10th grade english class or something?

Overdose
08-07-2004, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by Travh20
did you just learn the word oblivious in your 10th grade english class or something?

9th grade class, yep.

Evil Homer
08-08-2004, 08:11 PM
I learned a good word: Colloquial. It's what is scribbled all over my essays ;)